Most of the time you will indeed Google it, but very occasionally you might have to go and mess with the kernel source to fix a problem.
We had a server here that was suffering from memory leaks that would take it down every few days - thanks to the kernel being open source, it was possible to track down the modification that was causing the problem, and fix it.
There's not a chance we could do that with a Windows machine, and that's despite being a "Gold Partner" with a direct line to Redmond.
No - I'd worry about the several million tons of rock heading towards the atmosphere first.
Once that's dealt with, then we can start the interstellar finger pointing... it's probably just them damn terr'ists anyway, and what better incentive to go to Mars then to invade?
Aha - someone mentioning mod points, therefore making this (vaguely) on-topic.
It would appear I can moderate some of the comments on this story. What I'm confused by is why I can only moderate some of them, when I can't do others.
There are many things about the UK that could be described as nannying, but protecting historical buildings is not one of them.
It's not that you can't make any modifications, you just have to do them in a way that respects the building's appearance.
The building next door to us is also listed, and they're in the process of ripping out everything but the outer walls, and putting a new building in it.
In our case we can't get AC installed because our office is in a listed building, so making modifications is a nightmare - we had to get planning permission just to run a leased line in.
I'll let them off for not hearing - most of the data centers I've been in have been so noisy you'd be lucky to hear a JCB driving through the walls. Our main one is loud enough that we're legally required to wear ear-defenders now.
There's no excuse for being robbed 4 times though. If I had any hardware there, I'd certainly be moving it.
I haven't studied Erlang yet, but threads (or more generally concurrency) done securely would require mandatory locking of all data.
I may have misunderstood (I'm not exactly an expert in threading), but I believe that Erlang handles this is a scarily elegant manner... once assigned, a variable can not be changed.
The = operator in Erlang should be looked at in the mathematical sense, so the following (pseudo) code would fail:
a = 2 a = 1 + 3
Because 1+3 != 2
(Disclaimer: I've briefly dabbled in Erlang, but anything I say about it should be taken with several rocks of salt)
"I'd Adobe to put the Flash player (as well as the Flash program itself) under the GPL license. However, if they don't, they'll still have > 90% browser penetration, and be used by YouTube to deliver huge quantities of crap video to people."
Right now, in the age of streaming video, Flash is about as relevant as you can get.
Doing so would immediately result in incorrect, ugly code being presented to the end user, as character entities get double encoded.
Only if the people publishing content havn't been told not to use them, and since it's probably an in-house system, you can incorporate that into the training course that people will inevitably go on to be taught how to use it.
Wow... any reason for that? Between emacs and vi you've got all the bases covered, and you'd probably be much more efficient if you learnt to use *one* of them well, instead of all of them averagely.
I don't know the precise numbers at the moment, but that's fairly irrelavent.
I also don't know of any client who would quite happily turn around and say "Well, if it works for 20% of people, lets not worry about the other 80% of our customers who it won't work for. Viva la Web Standards!"
This is the real world, where a large proportion of sites are there to make a profit, not to stroke your ego.
Also, saying "I have used Dreamweaver" on your resume is probably going to be handy someday when decision-makers (i.e. PHBs) are looking for a web developer with Dreamweaver experience.
I got burned by that one before. I now ignore any job advert that includes the word "Dreamweaver". It's usually synomous with designers who think that clicking buttons == web development, and everything that entails.
You seem to be fairly misguided here (or possibly just inexperienced).
TextMate is a text editor. Nothing more, nothing less. It does have some very nice automation features - I'd put it almost on a par with Vim (let the flame wars commence!), but with a much shallower learning curve. At the end of the day though, it still only does what you tell it to do.
Of course there's a machine involved somewhere. I havn't RTFA, but I would imagine that the overall design, and any templates being used are hand coded, but they're then pulled together by a content management system, so that the reporters can publish new articles without having to call up the web development team and get them to hand type it as HTML.
Have you ever heard of a content management system.
It's just a hunch, but I think the NY Times is probably using one. That's where you handle things like translating & to &, and making the typography look good.
After a long time I've come to a simple conclusion.
Who gives a shit if you validate or not?
I'm a big supporter of web standards, but sadly there are certain browsers (hint: it has a big blue icon) that are not, and to make a site work reliably in them, you're probably going to have to build a site that doesn't validate.
So get over it, and get on with life, because what the client thinks is always more important then what the W3's validator thinks.
It's the case for almost any *large* dynamic website, but having spent a couple of years doing web development in the design industry, I can tell you that at least in the UK, a large proportion of the small agencies are using Dreamweaver for most things.
Fuck knows why - I'd rather be handed an Illustrator file and turn it into HTML then have the crap that Dreamweaver spits out given to me, and have to try and turn it into something dynamic.
Yes, and the license for the BSD core allows exactly that.
Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without modification...
The Mac OS license does not allow that (as they are entitled to do by the BSD license). And lets face it, Mac OS isn't exactly a few patches on top of BSD.
I assume you're one of those people who thinks they need their own IT department as well then. Either that, or you've got Bob's son who knows a bit about computers jury rigging your network.
Unless you're a large company, doing IT in house is a huge waste of money. Wouldn't you rather hire another sales person, or even another production person, then somebody to twiddle their thumbs while they wait for something to break?
Google are probably more trustworthy then anything you can do in house for a reasonable price, and honestly, do you think they even *care* about your data? They make enough money without trying to rip you off, and risking the awful publicity that would lead to.
Slashdot Mirror
Most of the time you will indeed Google it, but very occasionally you might have to go and mess with the kernel source to fix a problem.
We had a server here that was suffering from memory leaks that would take it down every few days - thanks to the kernel being open source, it was possible to track down the modification that was causing the problem, and fix it.
There's not a chance we could do that with a Windows machine, and that's despite being a "Gold Partner" with a direct line to Redmond.
No - I'd worry about the several million tons of rock heading towards the atmosphere first.
Once that's dealt with, then we can start the interstellar finger pointing... it's probably just them damn terr'ists anyway, and what better incentive to go to Mars then to invade?
This is a NASA run manned space mission. $3 million might stretch to the toilet paper, with maybe enough left over to buy a holder for it.
Aha - someone mentioning mod points, therefore making this (vaguely) on-topic.
It would appear I can moderate some of the comments on this story. What I'm confused by is why I can only moderate some of them, when I can't do others.
Anyway... move along, nothing to see here.
There are many things about the UK that could be described as nannying, but protecting historical buildings is not one of them.
It's not that you can't make any modifications, you just have to do them in a way that respects the building's appearance.
The building next door to us is also listed, and they're in the process of ripping out everything but the outer walls, and putting a new building in it.
In our case we can't get AC installed because our office is in a listed building, so making modifications is a nightmare - we had to get planning permission just to run a leased line in.
Hand in your geek card please.
Then go and watch Hackers. Your eyes might bleed, but I'm afraid it's required watching.
I'll let them off for not hearing - most of the data centers I've been in have been so noisy you'd be lucky to hear a JCB driving through the walls. Our main one is loud enough that we're legally required to wear ear-defenders now.
There's no excuse for being robbed 4 times though. If I had any hardware there, I'd certainly be moving it.
I may have misunderstood (I'm not exactly an expert in threading), but I believe that Erlang handles this is a scarily elegant manner... once assigned, a variable can not be changed.
The = operator in Erlang should be looked at in the mathematical sense, so the following (pseudo) code would fail:
a = 2
a = 1 + 3
Because 1+3 != 2
(Disclaimer: I've briefly dabbled in Erlang, but anything I say about it should be taken with several rocks of salt)
Let me translate that to the real world for you:
"I'd Adobe to put the Flash player (as well as the Flash program itself) under the GPL license. However, if they don't, they'll still have > 90% browser penetration, and be used by YouTube to deliver huge quantities of crap video to people."
Right now, in the age of streaming video, Flash is about as relevant as you can get.
I really should learn to leave the trolls alone, but I'm going to bite.
The ISP I work for is is almost exclusively based on Ubuntu Server, so that's a few thousand boxes worldwide for you.
And yes, we also pay Canonical (and incidently, quite a few other open source based companies) for support.
Only if the people publishing content havn't been told not to use them, and since it's probably an in-house system, you can incorporate that into the training course that people will inevitably go on to be taught how to use it.
Wow... any reason for that? Between emacs and vi you've got all the bases covered, and you'd probably be much more efficient if you learnt to use *one* of them well, instead of all of them averagely.
I don't know the precise numbers at the moment, but that's fairly irrelavent.
I also don't know of any client who would quite happily turn around and say "Well, if it works for 20% of people, lets not worry about the other 80% of our customers who it won't work for. Viva la Web Standards!"
This is the real world, where a large proportion of sites are there to make a profit, not to stroke your ego.
Yes, it's possible.
No, it's not as simple as it would be if people just supported the vertical-align property, which was intended for precisely that purpose.
I got burned by that one before. I now ignore any job advert that includes the word "Dreamweaver". It's usually synomous with designers who think that clicking buttons == web development, and everything that entails.
Be careful... they might come and bust a CAP in yo' ass.
</rimshot>
Grrr... why did /. decide to turn off the numbering on <ol> tags?
The whole point of them is that you get numbers...
Have you ever heard of a content management system.
It's just a hunch, but I think the NY Times is probably using one. That's where you handle things like translating & to &, and making the typography look good.
After a long time I've come to a simple conclusion.
Who gives a shit if you validate or not?
I'm a big supporter of web standards, but sadly there are certain browsers (hint: it has a big blue icon) that are not, and to make a site work reliably in them, you're probably going to have to build a site that doesn't validate.
So get over it, and get on with life, because what the client thinks is always more important then what the W3's validator thinks.
How I wish that was true.
It's the case for almost any *large* dynamic website, but having spent a couple of years doing web development in the design industry, I can tell you that at least in the UK, a large proportion of the small agencies are using Dreamweaver for most things.
Fuck knows why - I'd rather be handed an Illustrator file and turn it into HTML then have the crap that Dreamweaver spits out given to me, and have to try and turn it into something dynamic.
The Mac OS license does not allow that (as they are entitled to do by the BSD license). And lets face it, Mac OS isn't exactly a few patches on top of BSD.
Apple don't have intentions of reaching out to much more users though.
They have intentions of reaching out to more customers - you know, people who are actually going to pay them for more then just a Mac OS DVD.
I assume you're one of those people who thinks they need their own IT department as well then. Either that, or you've got Bob's son who knows a bit about computers jury rigging your network.
Unless you're a large company, doing IT in house is a huge waste of money. Wouldn't you rather hire another sales person, or even another production person, then somebody to twiddle their thumbs while they wait for something to break?
Google are probably more trustworthy then anything you can do in house for a reasonable price, and honestly, do you think they even *care* about your data? They make enough money without trying to rip you off, and risking the awful publicity that would lead to.