I actually had a degreed developer tell me, with a straight face, that he didn't do testing, as his professor told him it's the job of the QA department...
Sure, if you need to know that exactly 10,231,189 people visited your site today (and not 10,231,174). But knowing that, on average, 14% came from AOL and 22% came in off your Google ads (and which ads) and 15% off natural search (and what keywords) is another type of information altogether.
"...but the net effect of higher gas prices would be lower consumption."
No, the net effect of gas at $4/gallon would be having to pay higher prices for ALL goods and services, as increased transportation costs worked their way through the system. You'd also have fewer dollars to do it with, as many would have to transfer dollars from buying non-essential things like, say, food and clothing, to buying gas.
It would dramatically reduce discretionary spending, impact almost every industry, cause another round of layoffs as companies cut back since fewer people are buying their products, and otherwise be a massive hit to the economy.
God, don't schools teach economics at all these days?
But you are quite happy with the public, including people yet to be born acting as your "patron".
They have the right to buy it if they believe it has value to them, or do without, if they believe it has none.
And it's easier to find 10,000 people to pay $10 for a paperback, than it is to find a patron to part with $100,000 up front on nothing more than a idea.
"...or figure out how to differentiate "darknet traffic" from normal network traffic."
Ummm... if you flip that sentence around, you'll see that anything that's not "normal" traffic, or from known sources, is by definition abnormal traffic and/or from unknown sources... and deserves a closer look. By choosing to "trust" traffic to and from, say,/., or the iTunes music store, I can ignore them and focus my attention, and resources, elsewhere.
Further, I can choose to heavily examine upstream traffic from subnets like those belonging to Comcast or Earthlink, where such patterns are atypical, and where a higher preponderance of "abusers" might be lurking.
And yes, you can try to emulate other patterns, but is spending five hours downloading a single song worthwhile, if you have to emulate a typical 50K-at-a-time web page request pattern?
First line, second paragraph: "The protections it grants give me, as an author, the potential (not the right) to profit from those creations."
As such, the remainder of your analogies regarding ownership and effort bear little relation to fact (as often happens when someone attempts to argue by analogy). Prior to my writing a book, that particular piece of "land" didn't exist at all.
As to originality, some things are, and some things are not. We are, after all, human, and share the same roots. But since, in your worldview, nothing is original, perhaps we should simply stop writing new books and music, as we're seen and heard it all before. Nothing new here. Nothing more to say. Move along.
Sorry, but I belive you're wrong. Copyright exists to foster the creation of new ideas. It acknowledges that works of art do not just magically appear out of thin air, and that time, effort, training, and dollars go into their creation.
The protections it grants give me, as an author, the potential (not the right) to profit from those creations. If the "free market" you expouse decides my work is successful, and it's well received, those profits allow me the time and opportunity to create new works, thus further contributing to our culture.
It helps ensure that the best and brightest authors, writers, singers, directors, and other artists of our time spend their time doing that which enriches us all, and not spending their time greeting people at WalMart just to pay the rent.
I hear a lot about how the system is "broken", and little to nothing about what should replace it, other than nonsense about how book authors should spend their time giving concerts or consulting. Or that, as in the dark ages, they waste their time wandering about seeking patrons for their works.
People might now, as an example, pay the millions of dollars it would take to continue "Firefly" as a series. But how many of those people would have paid that money up front, before the show even existed, simply on an idea? The studio did. And made the investment.
The "ideas" you'd so blithely distribute often take years, or even decades, to create. And without the people who put words to paper and notes to a score, would not exist in those forms at all.
The founding fathers recognized those facts, and as such provided means and incentives for them to do so. They recognized that truly creative people are few and far between, and are pearls beyond price to a culture and society. In essence, writers and singers and storytellers ARE our culture and society.
Finally, if I may ask a question, why is it you somehow believe you are automatically entitled to the results of other people's work? That their time and efforts are yours for free?
That you can freely consume that which I create, simply because it's easy to do so, and I can not walk into your house, and consume yours?
"Darknets" have always been around and always will. By their very nature, you don't see them. You can't tell how many there are, and you certainly don't know what's going on inside them because you won't get invited without proving that you're one of them first.
Sorry, but if you're using the same network and infrastructure as the rest of us then those connections can be monitored, your endpoints mapped, and your packets and traffic patterns analyzed.
I'm quite sure, however, that the NSA appreciates your spreading your "totally secure" viewpoint around...
The size of the U.S. is 5.9M square miles. Canada's size is 9.9M. Natural resources can also include such things as water and timber, not just oil and minerals.
Wait to dramatically reduce your A/C bill in the summer? Install high-efficiency insulated solar reflecting windows. Plant shade trees and place awnings in strategic places.
It may not be as "sexy" as a bunch of windmills and a roof full of solar cells, but it will get the job done... and not need maintenance to boot.
Huh. One of the people I do work for has a IIS / ColdFusion MX / SQL Server installation that's doing about five million page views a day on a CMS-based dynamic site. Excuse me while I call the CTO up and tell him his system isn't "real world", and how his load-balanced clusters aren't "high availability". I'm sure he'll be interested in your views and experience.
"And that's the whole flippin' point. The same people who will make stupid mistakes writing system software in C will make mistakes in some higher-level language."
Assuming it let's them do so. When a string assignment is s1:= s2; there's not much you can do to screw it up.
Bugs are bugs. But bugs where some "serious" programer, who, in his need for speed and "efficiency", blithely strcpy'ed every argument in sight to a buffer whose size was "known" beforehand could have been entirely avoided.
Amazing how many things stay the same. I remember reading the same headlines for XP, W2K, and NT.
Though this article is pretty lame. First time I've read, "Ten reasons you should and shouldn't care about Microsoft's Windows Vista client," in a summary and the linked article doesn't even bother to list them.
BS. I start MAYBE a dozen or so programs a day on my computer. So how significant is my difference? I would have saved what on Linux, a fraction of a half of a second?
Perhaps if you're running a server AND using some stone-age CGI executable that's called millions of times the differences may start to pile up... but probably not. Most such things on Windows are created as services that are always running, don't need process creation to do their jobs, and use threads that are faster than Linux versions.
Actually, if the uber-geeks of the world had used a higher level language like Object Pascal or Modula for systems work, we wouldn't be in nearly the mess we're in now. Both languages used byte-length prefixed strings, and usually forced array bounds checking, which would have killed almost all of the current buffer-overflow errors and exploits in existence.
But no, we choose C, a cast-anything-to-anything-no-checks-whatsoever-poi nters-run-wild language PURELY for speed reasons, and ignored all of the other issues it created.
In today's 3GHz plus dual-core world, I'd happily give up, say, 5% worth of performance in exchange for a completely stable, secure system.
Actually, in terms of amunition the book itself sounds bad enough.
" He discusses what applications to install...secure the boot loader...init sequences and scripts...securing users and groups....kernel patching.... All of that is contained in chapter 1, and there are ten more to go!"
They make it sound like Windows, where all of these things need to be done first in order to lockdown the system.
Slashdot Mirror
I actually had a degreed developer tell me, with a straight face, that he didn't do testing, as his professor told him it's the job of the QA department...
Sure, if you need to know that exactly 10,231,189 people visited your site today (and not 10,231,174). But knowing that, on average, 14% came from AOL and 22% came in off your Google ads (and which ads) and 15% off natural search (and what keywords) is another type of information altogether.
Then again, as we're talking about old TV shows HD isn't an issue, now is it?
No, the net effect of gas at $4/gallon would be having to pay higher prices for ALL goods and services, as increased transportation costs worked their way through the system. You'd also have fewer dollars to do it with, as many would have to transfer dollars from buying non-essential things like, say, food and clothing, to buying gas.
It would dramatically reduce discretionary spending, impact almost every industry, cause another round of layoffs as companies cut back since fewer people are buying their products, and otherwise be a massive hit to the economy.
God, don't schools teach economics at all these days?
To paraphrase Vic Braden, "I've found that most people have done one year 10 times."
They have the right to buy it if they believe it has value to them, or do without, if they believe it has none.
And it's easier to find 10,000 people to pay $10 for a paperback, than it is to find a patron to part with $100,000 up front on nothing more than a idea.
Ummm... if you flip that sentence around, you'll see that anything that's not "normal" traffic, or from known sources, is by definition abnormal traffic and/or from unknown sources... and deserves a closer look. By choosing to "trust" traffic to and from, say, /., or the iTunes music store, I can ignore them and focus my attention, and resources, elsewhere.
Further, I can choose to heavily examine upstream traffic from subnets like those belonging to Comcast or Earthlink, where such patterns are atypical, and where a higher preponderance of "abusers" might be lurking.
And yes, you can try to emulate other patterns, but is spending five hours downloading a single song worthwhile, if you have to emulate a typical 50K-at-a-time web page request pattern?
As such, the remainder of your analogies regarding ownership and effort bear little relation to fact (as often happens when someone attempts to argue by analogy). Prior to my writing a book, that particular piece of "land" didn't exist at all.
As to originality, some things are, and some things are not. We are, after all, human, and share the same roots. But since, in your worldview, nothing is original, perhaps we should simply stop writing new books and music, as we're seen and heard it all before. Nothing new here. Nothing more to say. Move along.
The protections it grants give me, as an author, the potential (not the right) to profit from those creations. If the "free market" you expouse decides my work is successful, and it's well received, those profits allow me the time and opportunity to create new works, thus further contributing to our culture.
It helps ensure that the best and brightest authors, writers, singers, directors, and other artists of our time spend their time doing that which enriches us all, and not spending their time greeting people at WalMart just to pay the rent.
I hear a lot about how the system is "broken", and little to nothing about what should replace it, other than nonsense about how book authors should spend their time giving concerts or consulting. Or that, as in the dark ages, they waste their time wandering about seeking patrons for their works.
People might now, as an example, pay the millions of dollars it would take to continue "Firefly" as a series. But how many of those people would have paid that money up front, before the show even existed, simply on an idea? The studio did. And made the investment.
The "ideas" you'd so blithely distribute often take years, or even decades, to create. And without the people who put words to paper and notes to a score, would not exist in those forms at all.
The founding fathers recognized those facts, and as such provided means and incentives for them to do so. They recognized that truly creative people are few and far between, and are pearls beyond price to a culture and society. In essence, writers and singers and storytellers ARE our culture and society.
Finally, if I may ask a question, why is it you somehow believe you are automatically entitled to the results of other people's work? That their time and efforts are yours for free?
That you can freely consume that which I create, simply because it's easy to do so, and I can not walk into your house, and consume yours?
Though, since you insist, the US's proved oil reserves are at 22.45 billion bbl. Canada's are 178.9 billion bbl including shale oil.
Another interesting tidbit is that 85.2% of all of Canada's exports are to the US.
Sorry, but if you're using the same network and infrastructure as the rest of us then those connections can be monitored, your endpoints mapped, and your packets and traffic patterns analyzed.
I'm quite sure, however, that the NSA appreciates your spreading your "totally secure" viewpoint around...
And when the cop comes with an arrest warrent you'll finally get to see what you're paying for...
The size of the U.S. is 5.9M square miles. Canada's size is 9.9M. Natural resources can also include such things as water and timber, not just oil and minerals.
No, but if darknets are detectable, I can just not pass the traffic. Or, perhaps, simply give the packets an exceedingly low priority.
So yeah, you might get your downloaded music... eventually.
It may not be as "sexy" as a bunch of windmills and a roof full of solar cells, but it will get the job done... and not need maintenance to boot.
Huh. One of the people I do work for has a IIS / ColdFusion MX / SQL Server installation that's doing about five million page views a day on a CMS-based dynamic site. Excuse me while I call the CTO up and tell him his system isn't "real world", and how his load-balanced clusters aren't "high availability". I'm sure he'll be interested in your views and experience.
Assuming it let's them do so. When a string assignment is s1 := s2; there's not much you can do to screw it up.
Then you subscribe to the infinite number of gods theory?
And a "croc" with four fins instead of legs. Another transitional feature.
Thanks for sharing.
Bugs are bugs. But bugs where some "serious" programer, who, in his need for speed and "efficiency", blithely strcpy'ed every argument in sight to a buffer whose size was "known" beforehand could have been entirely avoided.
Though this article is pretty lame. First time I've read, "Ten reasons you should and shouldn't care about Microsoft's Windows Vista client," in a summary and the linked article doesn't even bother to list them.
This is news?
Perhaps if you're running a server AND using some stone-age CGI executable that's called millions of times the differences may start to pile up... but probably not. Most such things on Windows are created as services that are always running, don't need process creation to do their jobs, and use threads that are faster than Linux versions.
"Significant difference" my a**.
But no, we choose C, a cast-anything-to-anything-no-checks-whatsoever-poi nters-run-wild language PURELY for speed reasons, and ignored all of the other issues it created.
In today's 3GHz plus dual-core world, I'd happily give up, say, 5% worth of performance in exchange for a completely stable, secure system.
" He discusses what applications to install...secure the boot loader...init sequences and scripts...securing users and groups....kernel patching. ... All of that is contained in chapter 1, and there are ten more to go!"
They make it sound like Windows, where all of these things need to be done first in order to lockdown the system.