This only works if your goals for version two are a stable version one. The prototyping to reimplement makes sense if you have enough time. And sometimes you do.
The underlying point that comes up is that the code is not as valuable as the experience of writing it. This is why a modular framework is so good to have, so you can take small bites but see real effects. You realize the rewards more quickly. On top of that, modular code is less "write-only".
The rub is, of course, that you might spend as much time writing a modular, robust system as you would writing the same system from scratch twice, as is suggested in the parent comment.
ie: If Microsoft were to cut loose SQL server, and published the full and complete source code under a completely free and open license (Quit laughing! It's just an example!) would Oracle maintain their current sales volume?
Not likely.
Compare the cost of licensing SQL Server vs. Oracle. If you are going to buy a license from Oracle, its because SQL Server is not a viable option, regardless of its price. SQL Server and Oracle are just in different leagues, capabilities and price wise. In other words, if Micros~1 paid people $5 to use SQL Server, the people who buy Oracle would still buy.
Or do you think that Open Sourcing SQL Server is going to change it somehow into a more robust database than Oracle?
Here's my experience. I run a fairly successful business with a mid-sized accounting department. My employees have years of experience with Windows and Windows-based accounting software. It would simply not make sense to re-train them to use Linux.
While I see where you are coming from, I think the argument is pretty weak and biased (availability bias). Your experience is valid, but obviously it carries more weight with you than with others.
Thing about working for an unestablished business is that its pretty key to hire the best people, and I am just not convinced that people are unable to adapt rapidly (like over a week) to Linux. Sure, there are growing pains, but these people do not need to hack the OS, write scripts, get their screen saver and email working. All they have to do is run the accounting software client.
Its a pretty broad case to begin with, but I think the benefits of using Linux can be huge if you do it right. But this is getting off topic, so let me just say that a lot of the HRIS managers I know get pretty frustrated at having to reboot / kick the NT server regularly, and they are not computer experts. So its not like they have a huge intellectual investment in Windows.
Seems like HR / Accounting systems are basically database, and as part of the package the vendor sends along some management clients. The clients are not the core technology, and are probably easilly ported and platform independent of the server.
For the database you have the standard choices, (Oracle, DB2, some others). The clients are kind of independent of the server.
I am not answering the question, I am just speculating that there is a bit more to the choice than which vendor. If you are buying an HRIS or accounting system, and your definition of mid-sized company and my definition of mid-sized company mesh, than I would imagine that the platform will not be a big deal. This is not consumer software, this is server software, and my impression is that the playing field is a bit more level.
Now as for an open source alternative, that looks like a shame. A quick search does not turn up much for HRIS projects that are open sourced. Does not seem like such a tough task to tackle. Right -- lets just whip up a MySQL object model, store information about employees and have a PHP interface and XML and java [catching my breath]. These systems tend to be pretty complex, fairly specific (to the business processes that they fit in place with). Also, there are all kinds of legalities that go along with HR and accounting for mid-sized businesses.
So basically my answer is: PeopleSoft or Ceridian or IBM (just three quickies off the top of my head) would probably love to sell you a Linux HRIS. Maybe I am wrong, but this sort of thing was probably migrated to Windows from Unix back in the day, not the other way around. The key word above is sell.
I can not wait to see what Open Source solutions turn up here, but it is a difficult problem to solve, an my expectations are low.
You can still find dwarves and elves and hobbits, if you are into that sort of thing, and it may be a little formulaic, but definitely a departure from Tolkien.
They all have good points and bad points. If you do not have a strong reason to use one, you can narrow it down.
4. Which one supports the most x86 hardware NetBSD supports a wider range of non-x86 hardware than any other OS. This is an advantage you probably will not need.
1. Which is the easiest/best to get started with? It depends on when you consider the box "set up". If you are going to use it as a firewall / router, OpenBSD is hands down the way to go. Thats just the way it is. You want to spend as little time as you have to installing bug fixes.
If you are going to use the machine as an all purpose "learn about stuff" box, go with Free. Its used by the most people of the three, so there is a good community as far as dlists and howto's.
I studied the three a bit before making a choice for myself, and found that the FreeBSD deamon had a slightly more developed look than the netbsd logo. Objectively, I found the deamon logo more interesting than the blowfish in general. Don't get me started on penguins.
Just make a strong recommendation to them that they buy a repeater. If it gets big enough, you can make a push to have them get you a fiber-optic line. Sounds good to me.
Sounds like you need to create another side to your network.
If you have one machine running a firewall with the public internet connection (that is, it has a real IP address), you can have one set of rules for computers that you trust, one for wireless access. The wireless network has different rules for Owner, Co-Op, and Public, and does not have to use the same firewall rules as your wired network. You can still block the wireless access (different blocking for each group, ie owner might have access to the wired network, Co-Op and Public do not).
Stateful firewalls do not have to filter only one direction, and you could not run No-Cat without a stateful firewall.
There is a difference between actively breaking the law and having broken a law. There is nothing that a defendent should be able to say to her attorney that can incriminate them further or hurt their chances. Basically, if you can not trust your attorney, who can you trust?
If you are breaking the law, being a lawyer does not give you a license to be a consigliere.
So basically, in my opinion what you cited is a good point, but not necessarily related to bugging attorney-client conversations.
Just when you think you've seen the last one, there it is.
I have to admit, I love the mewing jars that line my shelves. Cleanup is no problem, but I have to do an informal "Ask Slashdot" -- Do they go in the recycling or the trash when its time to get the latest model?
I do not really know a whole lot about phone networks, wireless or otherwise. Let me say this though: Just because cell phones or satellite phones do not have wires does not change the fact that if you take out a node, everything connected (though the connection is wireless) is going to go down. If a cell phone tower goes down that was serving your area, you will probably have to go somewhere else to use your phone. (I am pretty sure not all celular networks are redundant).
Also, do you think it would be easier for a determined enemy to disable the CO or a tower? The point of the article is that CO's are vulnerable, and since the phone network is hierarchical, everyone connected to the CO is vulnerable. Same is true for a microwave tower, though they are probably cheaper and easier to replace.
Digital Rights Management is bad for users in the short term, will take some wrangling and creativity on the side of the license holders. They are trying to create technology and legislation that will allow them to know who and when someone uses a property that they license.
Initially, it will be more expensive for people to listen to music or read books, because instead of buying cd's or books, you buy the right to hear the song or the right read the book.
People will pay what they feel the material is worth. If I think that listening to a Wu Tang Clan is worth 3 cents, and they want 8, I won't pay. In terms of the market, this makes the market more efficient and provides some feedback to the artists. It also makes it possible to bundle in things like advertising to offset the cost (advertising is more valuable in this case because they know who they are marketing to.)
In the future, people will be able to pay for whatever they want, and the number of choices available to them will reflect the value they percieve in the service.
Actually, you would think that the security patches are covered by Windows Update, but the patch that closed up the "Hacked by Chinese" worm was not (at the time when the first infection took off). The update had been available seperately since May, but was not mentioned or noted in Windows Update. Again, Microsoft's fault, because the perception is that Windows Update will keep someone up to date, but you really have to subscribe to MS's security bulletin.
Look, I do not tell everyone about this, but I have an opportunity for you where you can make up to $7000 per week from your own home.
Everyone knows that the internet is synonymous with $$$, but until now, only a few people knew how to get the $$$.
I was looking at your resume, and it looks pretty good! Now, with times being as tough as they are, I want to let you know about a little tool at resume_goat.cx. This classy, non-trapping web site will submit your resume to all sorts of high tech employers out there just looking for people to recruit.
So you ask, how can this translate to $$$, well its this new technology called marketing! Sign up now by sending in $29.95 to yours truly, and I will let you in on my secret!
What you need is a way to program the glove to recognize certain rythmic motions and to interpret that as writing code. Back and forth, side to side, whatever, it would have to conform to certain preferences of the user. These motions are then interpreted and translated into functions and subroutines for whatever application you are writing.
"Few, I am exhausted. I just pulled off 10 lines of code!"
"I just do not have any more code in me for today..."
You are young and think you know everything. The school is not out to get you, you are just dreaming up reasons that you are getting a d in chemistry.
Superintendents get paid a lot because they are generally selected from an elite pool. It is just a better gamble to spend more money there.
Your teachers do not make a lot of money. There are a couple of ways to spin this, but its just an unfortunate fact that teachers are underpaid.
Finally, your grade in chemistry might be dropping, but grades are not the most important aspect of school. The experience itself is the one that will effect you more than your permanent record.
Pay attention, make the most of your opportunity. You will not look back on the poor circumstance that is high school and wished that you had tried less.
I believe the point that was being made was that while you may have something to hide, your privacy would not be significantly decreased by allowing the justice department to have an escrow key.
It is a valid question, and there is no slashdot friendly answer. The fact is that if you trust the government with that escrowed key, you have nothing to fear. If you have an essential mistrust of the government and administration, then its probably in your interest to archive PGP right now, distribute it to your friends, and get it into use before they ban such warez.
My question is this: If they ban encryption that does not use an escrowed key, but allow it if you use the escrowed type encryption, will anyone be able to tell that you used illegal technology to encrypt a message? I mean its encrypted, and how different can it be from another algorithms output?
Box cutters do have a functional purpose for peaceful endeavors. Perhaps their is no equivalent for encryption. That is, the government has taken the responsibility upon itself of keeping prying eyes out of your files.
One of the biggest users of encryption is the military and intelligence community for obvious reasons. A ban on encryption at large would prevent further development in academia from pushing for stronger algorithms (and cracking algorithms as well).
Aside from that, there is a pure academic aspect of encryption that is vital. These are difficult problems to hatch and solve, and we are better for having to solve them. If that does not justify encryption to more people than those with "something to hide", then the tide of learning has reached its highpoint.
We can not argue that computers are tools of terrorism, so lets ban them. That way no one will be able to communicate secretly.
While this is a good start, I also recommend banning:
Box cutters
Razor blades
Guns
Knowledge of encryption
In fact, to be really safe from terrorists, we should all live in caves and grow out beards.
[insert your mf'ing jefferson / franklin quote here, biotch.]
One great place to look for an old tower is your local Computer Goodwill or used bulletin board. Get an old box with a 300W power supply, take out the motherboard, start stacking SCSI drives in a daisy chain, and then bring it back to a SCSI controller on your main box.
Obviously SCSI is more expensive than IDE, but you get a little bit more. Just food for thought.
In the 20th Century, governments literally decimated the world population - murdering the equivalent of one out of every ten people alive at the beginning of the century. That doesn't count soldiers killed on the field of war: just murder - terrorism by government - civilians killed in concentration camps and carpet bombings and starvation-by-policy and the like. (ref. [hawaii.edu])
Where in that page does it show that the population has been decimated? Maybe in the last one hundred years, the number of murders have been equal to one tenth the population at the beginning of the century. Making a statement like the decimation you mentioned implies something far worse than has happened. Maybe there have been 150 million (a high guess) murders in the century. 2/3 would have come in the 30's and 40's around Stalin, Mao, and Hitler. The population is at 6 billion or so after a huge population growth. That seems closer to.125 out of 10 than 1 out of ten.
There are some things that I have trouble getting past in his arguement. If you find a flaw in his logic early, its hard to follow it seriously.
Katz makes the assertion that US of America is a politically polarized nation. Then he makes a logical error in saying that this is why we get bogged down in "what's politically left or right." The fact that we put so much effort into distinguishing between left and right exposes the fact that we really are a politically moderate nation. If we were polarized, it would be obvious who was "left" and who was "right" and there would be no discussion of the matter.
The fact is that the public at large is having trouble seeing the value of privacy without safety. Why would we preserve our privacy at the expense of safety from terrorists -- better to have the government playing a big brother than have them aloof. Sort of a "devil-you-know" situation.
Privacy itself does not seem to be the issue to me. If there are sufficient checks in place to see that the information that had been private is not used to harm you in any way, than life without privacy will be as good as a private life. If that adds safety, then you are better off.
The discussion is about whether or not we should fear a 1984 scenario, rather than how to avert it. There should not be a knee-jerk reaction that "oh the government is out to get us". They are currently a better alternative to anarchy, and if we put our heads together, we might be able to make them work for us.
If it should be possible for a CS student to write an XML parser, are there any good texts that people know of that go through this very process? I think it would be an interesting side project, but since I am not a computer scientist (or a student), its not easy to get a start.
Slashdot Mirror
This only works if your goals for version two are a stable version one. The prototyping to reimplement makes sense if you have enough time. And sometimes you do.
The underlying point that comes up is that the code is not as valuable as the experience of writing it. This is why a modular framework is so good to have, so you can take small bites but see real effects. You realize the rewards more quickly. On top of that, modular code is less "write-only".
The rub is, of course, that you might spend as much time writing a modular, robust system as you would writing the same system from scratch twice, as is suggested in the parent comment.
you see, my man is so confident in his distro / wm combo that he actually underclocks his processor in order to cut down monthly electric bills.
Compare the cost of licensing SQL Server vs. Oracle. If you are going to buy a license from Oracle, its because SQL Server is not a viable option, regardless of its price. SQL Server and Oracle are just in different leagues, capabilities and price wise. In other words, if Micros~1 paid people $5 to use SQL Server, the people who buy Oracle would still buy.
Or do you think that Open Sourcing SQL Server is going to change it somehow into a more robust database than Oracle?
Mike
While I see where you are coming from, I think the argument is pretty weak and biased (availability bias). Your experience is valid, but obviously it carries more weight with you than with others.
Thing about working for an unestablished business is that its pretty key to hire the best people, and I am just not convinced that people are unable to adapt rapidly (like over a week) to Linux. Sure, there are growing pains, but these people do not need to hack the OS, write scripts, get their screen saver and email working. All they have to do is run the accounting software client.
Its a pretty broad case to begin with, but I think the benefits of using Linux can be huge if you do it right. But this is getting off topic, so let me just say that a lot of the HRIS managers I know get pretty frustrated at having to reboot / kick the NT server regularly, and they are not computer experts. So its not like they have a huge intellectual investment in Windows.
Seems like HR / Accounting systems are basically database, and as part of the package the vendor sends along some management clients. The clients are not the core technology, and are probably easilly ported and platform independent of the server.
For the database you have the standard choices, (Oracle, DB2, some others). The clients are kind of independent of the server.
I am not answering the question, I am just speculating that there is a bit more to the choice than which vendor. If you are buying an HRIS or accounting system, and your definition of mid-sized company and my definition of mid-sized company mesh, than I would imagine that the platform will not be a big deal. This is not consumer software, this is server software, and my impression is that the playing field is a bit more level.
Now as for an open source alternative, that looks like a shame. A quick search does not turn up much for HRIS projects that are open sourced. Does not seem like such a tough task to tackle. Right -- lets just whip up a MySQL object model, store information about employees and have a PHP interface and XML and java [catching my breath]. These systems tend to be pretty complex, fairly specific (to the business processes that they fit in place with). Also, there are all kinds of legalities that go along with HR and accounting for mid-sized businesses.
So basically my answer is: PeopleSoft or Ceridian or IBM (just three quickies off the top of my head) would probably love to sell you a Linux HRIS. Maybe I am wrong, but this sort of thing was probably migrated to Windows from Unix back in the day, not the other way around. The key word above is sell.
I can not wait to see what Open Source solutions turn up here, but it is a difficult problem to solve, an my expectations are low.
Check out alt.sex.stories
You can still find dwarves and elves and hobbits, if you are into that sort of thing, and it may be a little formulaic, but definitely a departure from Tolkien.
Or is that not what you meant by fantasy?
They all have good points and bad points. If you do not have a strong reason to use one, you can narrow it down.
4. Which one supports the most x86 hardware
NetBSD supports a wider range of non-x86 hardware than any other OS. This is an advantage you probably will not need.
1. Which is the easiest/best to get started with?
It depends on when you consider the box "set up". If you are going to use it as a firewall / router, OpenBSD is hands down the way to go. Thats just the way it is. You want to spend as little time as you have to installing bug fixes.
If you are going to use the machine as an all purpose "learn about stuff" box, go with Free. Its used by the most people of the three, so there is a good community as far as dlists and howto's.
I studied the three a bit before making a choice for myself, and found that the FreeBSD deamon had a slightly more developed look than the netbsd logo. Objectively, I found the deamon logo more interesting than the blowfish in general. Don't get me started on penguins.
Just make a strong recommendation to them that they buy a repeater. If it gets big enough, you can make a push to have them get you a fiber-optic line. Sounds good to me.
Sounds like you need to create another side to your network.
If you have one machine running a firewall with the public internet connection (that is, it has a real IP address), you can have one set of rules for computers that you trust, one for wireless access. The wireless network has different rules for Owner, Co-Op, and Public, and does not have to use the same firewall rules as your wired network. You can still block the wireless access (different blocking for each group, ie owner might have access to the wired network, Co-Op and Public do not).
Stateful firewalls do not have to filter only one direction, and you could not run No-Cat without a stateful firewall.
There is a difference between actively breaking the law and having broken a law. There is nothing that a defendent should be able to say to her attorney that can incriminate them further or hurt their chances. Basically, if you can not trust your attorney, who can you trust?
If you are breaking the law, being a lawyer does not give you a license to be a consigliere.
So basically, in my opinion what you cited is a good point, but not necessarily related to bugging attorney-client conversations.
www.nedyah.org
Just when you think you've seen the last one, there it is.
I have to admit, I love the mewing jars that line my shelves. Cleanup is no problem, but I have to do an informal "Ask Slashdot" -- Do they go in the recycling or the trash when its time to get the latest model?
I do not really know a whole lot about phone networks, wireless or otherwise. Let me say this though: Just because cell phones or satellite phones do not have wires does not change the fact that if you take out a node, everything connected (though the connection is wireless) is going to go down. If a cell phone tower goes down that was serving your area, you will probably have to go somewhere else to use your phone. (I am pretty sure not all celular networks are redundant).
Also, do you think it would be easier for a determined enemy to disable the CO or a tower? The point of the article is that CO's are vulnerable, and since the phone network is hierarchical, everyone connected to the CO is vulnerable. Same is true for a microwave tower, though they are probably cheaper and easier to replace.
JA: What tips and inspiration can you offer aspiring kernel hackers?
Robert Love: Read the source, play with the source, and bathe regularly.
All computer science labs should have available eye-wash style emergency showers.
Digital Rights Management is bad for users in the short term, will take some wrangling and creativity on the side of the license holders. They are trying to create technology and legislation that will allow them to know who and when someone uses a property that they license.
Initially, it will be more expensive for people to listen to music or read books, because instead of buying cd's or books, you buy the right to hear the song or the right read the book.
People will pay what they feel the material is worth. If I think that listening to a Wu Tang Clan is worth 3 cents, and they want 8, I won't pay. In terms of the market, this makes the market more efficient and provides some feedback to the artists. It also makes it possible to bundle in things like advertising to offset the cost (advertising is more valuable in this case because they know who they are marketing to.)
In the future, people will be able to pay for whatever they want, and the number of choices available to them will reflect the value they percieve in the service.
Actually, you would think that the security patches are covered by Windows Update, but the patch that closed up the "Hacked by Chinese" worm was not (at the time when the first infection took off). The update had been available seperately since May, but was not mentioned or noted in Windows Update. Again, Microsoft's fault, because the perception is that Windows Update will keep someone up to date, but you really have to subscribe to MS's security bulletin.
Look, I do not tell everyone about this, but I have an opportunity for you where you can make up to $7000 per week from your own home.
Everyone knows that the internet is synonymous with $$$, but until now, only a few people knew how to get the $$$.
I was looking at your resume, and it looks pretty good! Now, with times being as tough as they are, I want to let you know about a little tool at resume_goat.cx. This classy, non-trapping web site will submit your resume to all sorts of high tech employers out there just looking for people to recruit.
So you ask, how can this translate to $$$, well its this new technology called marketing! Sign up now by sending in $29.95 to yours truly, and I will let you in on my secret!
What you need is a way to program the glove to recognize certain rythmic motions and to interpret that as writing code. Back and forth, side to side, whatever, it would have to conform to certain preferences of the user. These motions are then interpreted and translated into functions and subroutines for whatever application you are writing.
"Few, I am exhausted. I just pulled off 10 lines of code!"
"I just do not have any more code in me for today..."
Now you can get back to your own sick mind.
You are young and think you know everything. The school is not out to get you, you are just dreaming up reasons that you are getting a d in chemistry.
Superintendents get paid a lot because they are generally selected from an elite pool. It is just a better gamble to spend more money there.
Your teachers do not make a lot of money. There are a couple of ways to spin this, but its just an unfortunate fact that teachers are underpaid.
Finally, your grade in chemistry might be dropping, but grades are not the most important aspect of school. The experience itself is the one that will effect you more than your permanent record.
Pay attention, make the most of your opportunity. You will not look back on the poor circumstance that is high school and wished that you had tried less.
I believe the point that was being made was that while you may have something to hide, your privacy would not be significantly decreased by allowing the justice department to have an escrow key.
It is a valid question, and there is no slashdot friendly answer. The fact is that if you trust the government with that escrowed key, you have nothing to fear. If you have an essential mistrust of the government and administration, then its probably in your interest to archive PGP right now, distribute it to your friends, and get it into use before they ban such warez.
My question is this: If they ban encryption that does not use an escrowed key, but allow it if you use the escrowed type encryption, will anyone be able to tell that you used illegal technology to encrypt a message? I mean its encrypted, and how different can it be from another algorithms output?
Box cutters do have a functional purpose for peaceful endeavors. Perhaps their is no equivalent for encryption. That is, the government has taken the responsibility upon itself of keeping prying eyes out of your files.
One of the biggest users of encryption is the military and intelligence community for obvious reasons. A ban on encryption at large would prevent further development in academia from pushing for stronger algorithms (and cracking algorithms as well).
Aside from that, there is a pure academic aspect of encryption that is vital. These are difficult problems to hatch and solve, and we are better for having to solve them. If that does not justify encryption to more people than those with "something to hide", then the tide of learning has reached its highpoint.
Mike
We can not argue that computers are tools of terrorism, so lets ban them. That way no one will be able to communicate secretly.
While this is a good start, I also recommend banning:
Box cutters
Razor blades
Guns
Knowledge of encryption
In fact, to be really safe from terrorists, we should all live in caves and grow out beards.
[insert your mf'ing jefferson / franklin quote here, biotch.]
One great place to look for an old tower is your local Computer Goodwill or used bulletin board. Get an old box with a 300W power supply, take out the motherboard, start stacking SCSI drives in a daisy chain, and then bring it back to a SCSI controller on your main box.
Obviously SCSI is more expensive than IDE, but you get a little bit more. Just food for thought.
Where in that page does it show that the population has been decimated? Maybe in the last one hundred years, the number of murders have been equal to one tenth the population at the beginning of the century. Making a statement like the decimation you mentioned implies something far worse than has happened. Maybe there have been 150 million (a high guess) murders in the century. 2/3 would have come in the 30's and 40's around Stalin, Mao, and Hitler. The population is at 6 billion or so after a huge population growth. That seems closer to
There are some things that I have trouble getting past in his arguement. If you find a flaw in his logic early, its hard to follow it seriously.
Katz makes the assertion that US of America is a politically polarized nation. Then he makes a logical error in saying that this is why we get bogged down in "what's politically left or right." The fact that we put so much effort into distinguishing between left and right exposes the fact that we really are a politically moderate nation. If we were polarized, it would be obvious who was "left" and who was "right" and there would be no discussion of the matter.
The fact is that the public at large is having trouble seeing the value of privacy without safety. Why would we preserve our privacy at the expense of safety from terrorists -- better to have the government playing a big brother than have them aloof. Sort of a "devil-you-know" situation.
Privacy itself does not seem to be the issue to me. If there are sufficient checks in place to see that the information that had been private is not used to harm you in any way, than life without privacy will be as good as a private life. If that adds safety, then you are better off.
The discussion is about whether or not we should fear a 1984 scenario, rather than how to avert it. There should not be a knee-jerk reaction that "oh the government is out to get us". They are currently a better alternative to anarchy, and if we put our heads together, we might be able to make them work for us.
If it should be possible for a CS student to write an XML parser, are there any good texts that people know of that go through this very process? I think it would be an interesting side project, but since I am not a computer scientist (or a student), its not easy to get a start.