I already looked it up... Eziekiel 25:17 iirc. The passage in my copy was way more bland than Sam's -- hence I quote a different passage when *I* kill ppl. ymmv.
Is the whole world having to show its database developers how to use a copying machine?
funny you should say that -- i'm good at coding but can't operate office equipment to save my life. it took me about 10 tries over the course of two months in order to properly navigate our fax machine. and those big multi-purpose, do-everything enterprise printers? don't get me started.
i'm amazed anyone can use them -- the only time you get to practice is when you're up in front of everyone and other people are waiting in line. maybe that's why i like computers... i can screw them up 95% of the time in private and only show people what i do right;)
at my first pro job i came in one day at 9am. we had an unmeetable deadline so I ended up staying until 11pm (i still wasn't done). i drove ~30 mins home. as i was going to bed i had a realization, which i scribbled on a sheet of paper. i tried to go to sleep, but i ended up saying "screw it", got dressed and went back to work. i got to work about 1am. i worked until about 2pm, went home and slept for a long time. total hours 13+13 = 26 with a two hour "break" (an hour which was driving).
i used to be a big php fan (still a fan, but not a big one) and i was always surprised/dismayed that everyone wanted to store images for web-based applications (catalog-style images, user-submitted icons/graphics, banners, etc) in a database.
i was always under the impression that the filesystem was a better place for this, assuming the directory structure was simple or fixed (i.e. you wouldn't be creating thousands of subdirs dynamically). why store all your banners in a table as BLOBs when you can simply have a web-accessible directory and store them there?
i never really found a clear reason on which was better performance-wise, though i suspect the filesystem-based way is. i also found it to be less of a hassle to implement. any intelligent thoughts?
I know this article fits right in with Bash Microsoft Day (everyday!!) but I urge you to reconsider. The RN player is trashy and they're giving out the pieces of the code which nobody could benefit from. No one is going to use their code in other projects because their player is substandard, so it's a bit like being able to fuck an elderly, ugly whore for free... sure, it's free, but who gives a rat's ass?
yes, I think there's a valid argument for EULAs, however, I think there should be some kind of regulation. for instance...
important items in the EULA are often hidden or hard to find. EULAs should be ordered in chronological order of what will happen when the software is installed. also, items should be ordered in order of probability of happening, i.e. any actions the program is written to do (like spam your mailbox's email addies) would have to come before the 15 pages of lawyer-speak about how we can't sue the developer in the case that the software malfunctions (which, hopefully, it wasn't programmed to do) and your house burns down.
90% of EULA content is the same. when software is released under the GPL or Apache or Artistic licenses, the user (assuming they've reviewed the license once before) has a reasonable idea of what they can or cannot do. common EULA sections, such as "you can't sue us, even if our program blows your machine up" (and the pages of related wording afterwards) can be summarized, or pointed to hyperlink-style. i.e. "this software is covered under the 'You Cannot Sue Us' clause, which could be a link to a standardized, common document that explains all the ugly details. the actual EULA could contain this statement, as well as any modifications the developers have made... that way, there's hopefully less to look at ("ah, they support the 'We Won't Ever Touch Any Non-Directly-Related Files on Your Computer', but they do take a snapshot of my entire filesystem and send it back to the mothership every night. *clicks 'NO'*
i think there are alot of very reasonable ways to standardize and govern EULAs. of course, I'm just a programmer, so what do i know.
they're not discussing the equivalent of a microship in the article, they're discussing the atomic equivalent of a logic gate -- today's processor have billions that are hundreds of thousands of times larger. can you imagine a single processor's worth of those atoms working as a single chip. i bet the Q3 benchmarks would run great on that.
this is it -- this is the way computing will go. ultra-small, using tiny amounts of energy (you could power a tiny supercomputer just with your body heat. a few breakthroughs from now and combined with advanced MEMs, the possibilities are frightening.
I agree that MS will find some way to make it just as hard, of not harder, for non-MS apps to read from and write to Word docs. I was actually thinking they'd use lawyers -- they'll copyright or trademark the format (they've talked about doing this in regards to.NET services) and try to sue anyone that writes software that uses it. My $.02
...Then we're screwed. Literally, our very lives are at stake now. George and I are just praying that we can finish 'Episode III' in time, before it's all over."
Wow, if there's one thing you can't convince me of it's that George Lucas is worried about his financials.
Then again, if he is, I'd be glad to fork over $60 for the original, un-enhanced, un-mutiliated Star Wars Trilogy on DVD.
the whole point of that is true, but in this situation it isn't Microsoft on the outside trying to get in (with proprietary technology) but them on the inside, trying to keep their mediocre but industry-dominating tech a secret to everyone, when it would be in everyone's best interests if they just released the damn stuff... but Microsoft realizes that as their grip on their proprietary standards slips, so will their dominance on the PC industry and their expected profits.
This may even get modded down, but we all know thsi is what will happen. And it only has to happen once and then the cat is let out of the bag. Sad that is has to come to that, but...
it sounds so silly, but i honestly think that would be great. the news folks would be all over that... microsoft's info being "stolen" because their operating system using the protocols do them poorly enough the bypassing security is easy. my mind could go in circles with this for the rest of the day.
to paraphrase the old saying "you can please all the people some of the time or some of the people all the time" -- asking for *the one* (product here) will never work, because some people will be dissatisfied no matter what. and in the OSS world, some people that aren't happy with the current situation take it upon themselves to provide an alternative they do like. asking everyone to like the same thing will never happen. it never has. so, even though it may seem that competition wastes alot of energy, i think it keeps everything fresh. besides, projects that try to do everything turn into ungodly behemoths and then the people that like it quick and simple end up splintering off anyhow. competition is inevitable, so choose sides and help out!:)
This strategy has existed for decades and I find it not funny nor worth getting your panties in a bunch about.
I think you're missing the point. It's not the strategy that's amusing, it's the fact that it's such a poor effort. Microsoft doesn't offer one reason to use XP that doesn't also exist in Mac OS X. Microsoft Office? They have that for OS X. Multi-user? Yeah, OS X has that. Etc, etc.
it's like an ad from Iraq's tourism industry trying to lure beach-goers away from Florida:
Sun? We have that. Sand? We have lots of that too!
This is almost as silly as Microsoft hosting the "we have the way out" anti-unix site on freebsd. but i digress...
i just started going to school again part-time, and they are M$-whores. On the plus side I got free copies of Windows XP and VS.NET. I haven't used them and probably never will, but you never know.
My CS 171 course is taught using solely VC++. In fact alot of students noticed when I brought in a non-Windows lappy into our lab (our classroom is several long tables with Thinkpads with NT4 on them) -- they look at me differently because I get all my work done with vim in a console. I am by no means even a power *NIX user, and it concerns me that I get the feeling that they think I'm doing something they couldn't do.
Slashdot Mirror
...because people will pay that much for them
hehe, i've used your CSV library... got an org/ostermiller dir around here somewhere...
I already looked it up... Eziekiel 25:17 iirc. The passage in my copy was way more bland than Sam's -- hence I quote a different passage when *I* kill ppl. ymmv.
slashdot was tons of free, pretty pictures, just check out thise spiffy icons at the top of the page!
funny you should say that -- i'm good at coding but can't operate office equipment to save my life. it took me about 10 tries over the course of two months in order to properly navigate our fax machine. and those big multi-purpose, do-everything enterprise printers? don't get me started.
i'm amazed anyone can use them -- the only time you get to practice is when you're up in front of everyone and other people are waiting in line. maybe that's why i like computers... i can screw them up 95% of the time in private and only show people what i do right ;)
at my first pro job i came in one day at 9am. we had an unmeetable deadline so I ended up staying until 11pm (i still wasn't done). i drove ~30 mins home. as i was going to bed i had a realization, which i scribbled on a sheet of paper. i tried to go to sleep, but i ended up saying "screw it", got dressed and went back to work. i got to work about 1am. i worked until about 2pm, went home and slept for a long time. total hours 13+13 = 26 with a two hour "break" (an hour which was driving).
i was always under the impression that the filesystem was a better place for this, assuming the directory structure was simple or fixed (i.e. you wouldn't be creating thousands of subdirs dynamically). why store all your banners in a table as BLOBs when you can simply have a web-accessible directory and store them there?
i never really found a clear reason on which was better performance-wise, though i suspect the filesystem-based way is. i also found it to be less of a hassle to implement. any intelligent thoughts?
which way is the elderly ugly free whore?
hmmm Saddam wasn't using AOL? he may be more dangerous than we thought.
- important items in the EULA are often hidden or hard to find. EULAs should be ordered in chronological order of what will happen when the software is installed. also, items should be ordered in order of probability of happening, i.e. any actions the program is written to do (like spam your mailbox's email addies) would have to come before the 15 pages of lawyer-speak about how we can't sue the developer in the case that the software malfunctions (which, hopefully, it wasn't programmed to do) and your house burns down.
- 90% of EULA content is the same. when software is released under the GPL or Apache or Artistic licenses, the user (assuming they've reviewed the license once before) has a reasonable idea of what they can or cannot do. common EULA sections, such as "you can't sue us, even if our program blows your machine up" (and the pages of related wording afterwards) can be summarized, or pointed to hyperlink-style. i.e. "this software is covered under the 'You Cannot Sue Us' clause, which could be a link to a standardized, common document that explains all the ugly details. the actual EULA could contain this statement, as well as any modifications the developers have made... that way, there's hopefully less to look at ("ah, they support the 'We Won't Ever Touch Any Non-Directly-Related Files on Your Computer', but they do take a snapshot of my entire filesystem and send it back to the mothership every night. *clicks 'NO'*
i think there are alot of very reasonable ways to standardize and govern EULAs. of course, I'm just a programmer, so what do i know.they're not discussing the equivalent of a microship in the article, they're discussing the atomic equivalent of a logic gate -- today's processor have billions that are hundreds of thousands of times larger. can you imagine a single processor's worth of those atoms working as a single chip. i bet the Q3 benchmarks would run great on that.
this is it -- this is the way computing will go. ultra-small, using tiny amounts of energy (you could power a tiny supercomputer just with your body heat. a few breakthroughs from now and combined with advanced MEMs, the possibilities are frightening.
I agree that MS will find some way to make it just as hard, of not harder, for non-MS apps to read from and write to Word docs. I was actually thinking they'd use lawyers -- they'll copyright or trademark the format (they've talked about doing this in regards to .NET services) and try to sue anyone that writes software that uses it. My $.02
forget blade servers, gimme a rack full of these.
Wow, if there's one thing you can't convince me of it's that George Lucas is worried about his financials.
Then again, if he is, I'd be glad to fork over $60 for the original, un-enhanced, un-mutiliated Star Wars Trilogy on DVD.
Just curious -- but how does that compare with the average price of new DVDs in Japan?
the whole point of that is true, but in this situation it isn't Microsoft on the outside trying to get in (with proprietary technology) but them on the inside, trying to keep their mediocre but industry-dominating tech a secret to everyone, when it would be in everyone's best interests if they just released the damn stuff... but Microsoft realizes that as their grip on their proprietary standards slips, so will their dominance on the PC industry and their expected profits.
This may even get modded down, but we all know thsi is what will happen. And it only has to happen once and then the cat is let out of the bag. Sad that is has to come to that, but...
it sounds so silly, but i honestly think that would be great. the news folks would be all over that... microsoft's info being "stolen" because their operating system using the protocols do them poorly enough the bypassing security is easy. my mind could go in circles with this for the rest of the day.
Probably because they know it'll never work :P
to paraphrase the old saying "you can please all the people some of the time or some of the people all the time" -- asking for *the one* (product here) will never work, because some people will be dissatisfied no matter what. and in the OSS world, some people that aren't happy with the current situation take it upon themselves to provide an alternative they do like. asking everyone to like the same thing will never happen. it never has. so, even though it may seem that competition wastes alot of energy, i think it keeps everything fresh. besides, projects that try to do everything turn into ungodly behemoths and then the people that like it quick and simple end up splintering off anyhow. competition is inevitable, so choose sides and help out! :)
I think you're missing the point. It's not the strategy that's amusing, it's the fact that it's such a poor effort. Microsoft doesn't offer one reason to use XP that doesn't also exist in Mac OS X. Microsoft Office? They have that for OS X. Multi-user? Yeah, OS X has that. Etc, etc.
it's like an ad from Iraq's tourism industry trying to lure beach-goers away from Florida:
Sun? We have that. Sand? We have lots of that too!
This is almost as silly as Microsoft hosting the "we have the way out" anti-unix site on freebsd. but i digress...
indeed, it's just you and Bill Gates running Windows. God bless you.
My CS 171 course is taught using solely VC++. In fact alot of students noticed when I brought in a non-Windows lappy into our lab (our classroom is several long tables with Thinkpads with NT4 on them) -- they look at me differently because I get all my work done with vim in a console. I am by no means even a power *NIX user, and it concerns me that I get the feeling that they think I'm doing something they couldn't do.