get a professional, and use google - first hit on searching for fireworks electronic blasting cap. I have worked with profesisonal pyrotechnicians in the past, and its tricky business. You really don't want to be playing around with this without proper training. First of all, you will have to replace all the fuses on the fireworks you buy, which will probably render about half of them useless. Pro pyrotechnics are actually built with the options of electric igniters. the stuff you buy in shops isn't. you are probably better off making or buying fusewire and timing it on fuselength.
for proper electric firing you will need the fireworks to go with it. this means digging a trench, getting firing mortars, and proper shells. Also, assuming you go ahead with this, despite everything (and you somehow getting hold of all the stuff required) you will need to comply with a bunch of regulations (for the US, but every country has similar regulations). Think. there is a pretty good reason for these rules.
This is one of the most confused responses I know of on this subject. Not your fault, I hear it frequently. I would like to clarify some things for you. There are 2 basic types of OSS devs. Those that are employed by a company with some interest in OSS, and those that do it purely for fun. The devs in the first group don't develop for end users, they develop for their company. Somehow, through some process (in which they may be involved at some point) the Company decides what they have to work on, and when it should be done. This may have some benefit for the end user, it may not - and that is totally besides the point -- for all you know these devs are hacking away at some piece of code that will never be distributed outside of the Company anyway.
While this may be OSS development in the sense that people work on OSS code, it isn't about this topic - the "FLOSS Community" and the coders that form part of this community. Those coders tend to fall in the second camp. They tend to work for reasons other then direct cash. They do it for fun, peer recognition, whatever. For the majority of these people, "non-coding end-users" are the same bunch of clusterfucks they deal with everyday during the dayjob, and tend to not feature very prominently in the motivation chain. The things that drive them are project that are "fun" to code, "pet projects" and all that kind of stuff. They have little motivation to work on projects that are "boring", "seen as difficult" or "of no interest to the developers". This camp of OSS developers "must" do nothing, and more importantly, owe you nothing.
You then bring in some muddled argumentations about the "market" and "running out of business". Unless the OSS coder in question is pretty incompetent, and gets fired from his (quite possibly non-OSS related) dayjob, there is no "business" to be run out of. Most of these projects *are* pet projects, and they only reason you can use them for free is because the coder in question has an urge to tell the world: "Look what I can do!!"
Now its time to bring market drivers / basic economics into the picture. You, as a non-coding end-user, want an application. There are some half-way-there projects out there, but non really fit your bill. You are angry because all the selfish devs only think of their pet projects and having fun. Some entrepeneur, somewhere, will know this, and hire a bunch of devs to create a project you, and hopefully many others, will pay good money for. Only now, once renumeration has entered the picture, can you speak of a market in a meaningful way. Now you are a paying customer, and you can vote with your wallet and feet.
Unless you are a cheapskate, and don't want to pay for anything, but still want every little piece of functionality handed to you "just so". If you ain't paying the cash, either do it yourself, or STFU.
Re:Keywords: Government. Health Care. Disaster
on
Biggest IT Disaster Ever?
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
get this - Halliburton *has* a UK division, and they are actually the main project management company responsible - they received all the cash from the UK government, and are responsible for handing out the money to the subcontractors that build the various systems. I have been involved in the past in several different aspects of the tendering and scoping of parts of this project. It outright disgusting
not a troll, simple fact. I manager several hundred Linux servers, as well as a couple of windows servers. And yes, he was saying he was replacing AD, and no, he wasn't using FDS. Having said that, FDS still has a way to go before it is ready to replace AD.
yes, and the weeks you need to actually set this all up together in an enterprise (read: supportable by larger groups of people) setting, plus the months you need to actually get it all stable, reliable, supportable, and just the way your business needs it (i.e. it integrates with lots of packages used in your enterprise) are *obviously* a much better investment of your time as opposed to doing something, well, more value-add for the people you work for. Like, solve real business problems. After all Active Directory can cost several hundreds of dollars!! and will take days!! to set up! integrating 11 different major services is much better because its Open Source!!!!
Believe me - I love open source - I run a team that looks after several hundred linux servers in a 24/7 operation. Wouldn't have it any other way. But even pretending that the flimsy, unintuitive, mashup of 11 different services is somehow better for your business then just installing AD is insane.
Dude, you must be a troll, but I'll bite. That is just such a load of bullshit, you could *never* be an IT consultant. First of all, if you are coding, you aren't a consultant - a consultant "consults" i.e. you advise the customer on the best course of action to achieve a certain goal. This may be architectural, infrastructure, security, or any other field, but it is *advise* - a good consultant is too *expensive* to be sitting there knocking out code. If your customer can afford to have you write (evidently crappy) code on his dime, you aren't a consultant, you are a tech/engineer, with delusions of grandeur.
Having said that, your attitude is simplistic, and hints of a general lack of intelligence. Whatever kind of engineer you think you may be, you suck at it. I can tell you this simply from looking at your post. Security should be a pervasive part of all you do, whether you are a dev, a server wrangler, or whatver. Saying "we don't have the knowledge or time to make sure its secure" is like a pilot saying "I don't know how close to ground I am, I'm busy enough keeping this plane in the air without having to worry abou...." Cue planecrash.
Place your code in escrow. That way your customer has the guarantee that even if you should go belly-up, they still have access to the code - which in commercial settings is usually the driver behind this. There are usually few other valid reasons (other then to just steal your work). We are in a similar position - medium size ASP doing business with very large global players, and thats how we deal with it.
yeah, I thought the same thing - TFA goes something like "I am going to compare and benchmark 3 things for you, except that I am not really going to compare one of them, but while we are on the subject, the one I can't compare for you sucks anyway". The conclusion is just as good: "You can either choose one, or the other. You should choose the one I did, because it r0x0rz and is only better at one thing, but you may want the other one, because my test show it is performs better. Also, theone like has no future."
good effort....
MS is not being fined by the EU for being a monopolist, or for being a successful company, or anything of the sort. They are being fined because the EU made some specific demand, like - produce working, legible, understandable and implementable specifications for your interoperability protocol suite - CIFS etc. - and they refuse to do so, obfuscating everything.
The EU doesn't much care if every server in the EU is a windows server, but they do want to make that others have a chance of actually interoperating with those servers. Splitting up MS isn't going to achieve that, but fines will.
If you need WORM, it will usually be for compliance purposes. And if you need it for compliance purposes, the choice of filesystem simply isn't yours. Netapp, EMC, IBM and others all provide out-of-the-box WORM solutions for not to much money that are certified WORM devices - i.e. you can turn around to your local regulator with a piece of paper in your hand that proves your WORM is really WORM. From my experience with Netapp WORM devices, you are going to be stuck with XFS - incidentally, I spent a good portion of my time yesterday trying to recover from a broken XFS filesystem on a Netapp device, 4 day after our support contract ran out (isn't it always like that?) - trying to recover an XFS filesystem is like taking sandpaper to the platters......
Thanks for the tip - Unattended looks like a great toolset - I have been wanting to get my team off Ghost for a while now, and I'll get them to look into this.
Ask the Gartner Group. They have a (surprisingly, for them) insightful document called "Creating RFP's for fun and profit - Document ID R-950-131
It will only cost you $995 and will teach you *everything* you need to know about creating RFP's and executing on them. On any kind of sizable project the approach they suggest will save you between 20% to 45% in purchasing costs, and it will make sure all relevant stakeholders are included.
Personally I believe Gartner are a bunch of wankers, too far stuck up their own arses, but this document is good. Get it.
Even a dual athlon (multi-core or not) is likely to have an internal NUMA architecture. I just bought some new servers that have exactly those properties.
Re:Don't use your distro tools to install it...
on
Firefox 1.0.7 Released
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Heh, a list of many complex actions involving different user ID's, directories and other computer "magic" as seen from a users perspective, followed by:
"The install was as easy as anything packaged by Vise or InstallShield"
Can you please pass some of that crack you seem to be smoking? I'm a big linux fan, but installing anything, not in the least a user install from firefox, does not compare with the "double click setup.exe" from vise or installshield.
And before all the fanboys knee-jerk with the security/spyware/virus/whatever-my-linux-kung-fu-i s-so-cool-i-kick-your-ass stuff - I know, i use linux and firefox. but that still doesn't make it an easy install. The distro install, incidentally, is pretty easy though, so just wait for the vendor updates mmmkay?
What we really need from government is an investigation of the long-term effects of OSS on our indigenous software industry, assistance to combat the threat to the industry's livelihood that OSS might pose and the development of a strategy to build on the opportunities that OSS has created. Without prompt action, my fear is that a further move towards OSS could result in the nightmare scenario of OSS at one extreme and Microsoft at the other with nothing else in between. Where would our freedom of choice be then?
in other words: OSS is going to take away my gravy train!!
You are confusing issues. Publishing a link to someone's site (in the way/. and fark and many others do) is the way the web works. This is not what fuckrudders did - they simply presented the content as their own, without reference to the guy at all. They stole his content - bad enough in itself - and then also stole his bandwith while they were at it.
The guy is *totally* in his rights to change the content on his site to anything he likes, including pictures of slaughterhouses, if he desires to do so. Morevoer, he is totally in his rights to do this for a selective portion of his audience. He did nothing wrong! This is the way the internet works. You put things on the internet, people find them, link to them, you don't like some of the people linking to them, and so you replace it with something else.
You are seriously on the wrong side of this particular debate. Did something similar yourself, perhaps?
Cite one other example of a space-going side mounted payload. Work out percentage of payloads travelling to space on top of a rocket vs. side mounted payloads. I read "Supposed to be" to mean "based on sound engineering and risk management principles" also know as "Common Sense" to some people.
I think the article is spot on, and the reporter is not confused about anything at all - the reporter is rightly asking what the valuation of the stock is really based on - reporter notes vague handwaving, a non-committal (beta) software stream, much, much rumours, and the fact that people at google like to eat. The reporter asks - in not so many words - how and when google will start delivering on that stock price - i.e. where google's *80 billion* valuation is hidden, and how, if at any time at all, this will be capitalised.
Google's success is not at doubt, rather, the reporter draws some subtle parallels to the dotcombusts of yesteryear, and hints at potential repetition and subsequent dissapointment of those times.
This is so correct - a bank is not interested in seeing the law served, it is interested in seeing their business served. Those two are rarely the same. Probably some lame misguided attempt to just make the whole thing "go away"
I already get those at McDonalds today - who needs these acedemics to come up with this when you can just go out and buy it in the store?
Re:I wish I had fibre optic on my desktop
on
Lucas's New HQ
·
· Score: 1
rubbish - lets assume that a cinema-grade frame would take about 25 minutes to render, your 10gbps pipe to and from the supervisor isn't going to make much of a difference on the grand scale of things
Slashdot Mirror
get a professional, and use google - first hit on searching for fireworks electronic blasting cap. I have worked with profesisonal pyrotechnicians in the past, and its tricky business. You really don't want to be playing around with this without proper training. First of all, you will have to replace all the fuses on the fireworks you buy, which will probably render about half of them useless. Pro pyrotechnics are actually built with the options of electric igniters. the stuff you buy in shops isn't. you are probably better off making or buying fusewire and timing it on fuselength.
for proper electric firing you will need the fireworks to go with it. this means digging a trench, getting firing mortars, and proper shells. Also, assuming you go ahead with this, despite everything (and you somehow getting hold of all the stuff required) you will need to comply with a bunch of regulations (for the US, but every country has similar regulations). Think. there is a pretty good reason for these rules.
you are playing with fire.....
This is one of the most confused responses I know of on this subject. Not your fault, I hear it frequently. I would like to clarify some things for you. There are 2 basic types of OSS devs. Those that are employed by a company with some interest in OSS, and those that do it purely for fun. The devs in the first group don't develop for end users, they develop for their company. Somehow, through some process (in which they may be involved at some point) the Company decides what they have to work on, and when it should be done. This may have some benefit for the end user, it may not - and that is totally besides the point -- for all you know these devs are hacking away at some piece of code that will never be distributed outside of the Company anyway.
While this may be OSS development in the sense that people work on OSS code, it isn't about this topic - the "FLOSS Community" and the coders that form part of this community. Those coders tend to fall in the second camp. They tend to work for reasons other then direct cash. They do it for fun, peer recognition, whatever. For the majority of these people, "non-coding end-users" are the same bunch of clusterfucks they deal with everyday during the dayjob, and tend to not feature very prominently in the motivation chain. The things that drive them are project that are "fun" to code, "pet projects" and all that kind of stuff. They have little motivation to work on projects that are "boring", "seen as difficult" or "of no interest to the developers". This camp of OSS developers "must" do nothing, and more importantly, owe you nothing.
You then bring in some muddled argumentations about the "market" and "running out of business". Unless the OSS coder in question is pretty incompetent, and gets fired from his (quite possibly non-OSS related) dayjob, there is no "business" to be run out of. Most of these projects *are* pet projects, and they only reason you can use them for free is because the coder in question has an urge to tell the world: "Look what I can do!!"
Now its time to bring market drivers / basic economics into the picture. You, as a non-coding end-user, want an application. There are some half-way-there projects out there, but non really fit your bill. You are angry because all the selfish devs only think of their pet projects and having fun. Some entrepeneur, somewhere, will know this, and hire a bunch of devs to create a project you, and hopefully many others, will pay good money for. Only now, once renumeration has entered the picture, can you speak of a market in a meaningful way. Now you are a paying customer, and you can vote with your wallet and feet.
Unless you are a cheapskate, and don't want to pay for anything, but still want every little piece of functionality handed to you "just so". If you ain't paying the cash, either do it yourself, or STFU.
get this - Halliburton *has* a UK division, and they are actually the main project management company responsible - they received all the cash from the UK government, and are responsible for handing out the money to the subcontractors that build the various systems. I have been involved in the past in several different aspects of the tendering and scoping of parts of this project. It outright disgusting
not a troll, simple fact. I manager several hundred Linux servers, as well as a couple of windows servers. And yes, he was saying he was replacing AD, and no, he wasn't using FDS. Having said that, FDS still has a way to go before it is ready to replace AD.
yes, and the weeks you need to actually set this all up together in an enterprise (read: supportable by larger groups of people) setting, plus the months you need to actually get it all stable, reliable, supportable, and just the way your business needs it (i.e. it integrates with lots of packages used in your enterprise) are *obviously* a much better investment of your time as opposed to doing something, well, more value-add for the people you work for. Like, solve real business problems. After all Active Directory can cost several hundreds of dollars!! and will take days!! to set up! integrating 11 different major services is much better because its Open Source!!!!
Believe me - I love open source - I run a team that looks after several hundred linux servers in a 24/7 operation. Wouldn't have it any other way. But even pretending that the flimsy, unintuitive, mashup of 11 different services is somehow better for your business then just installing AD is insane.
My brother hates standardized education and wanted to do something besides work at a McJob so he joined the Maries.
The Maries? is that some sort of trans-sexual branch of the US Army? Trained to rain chaos on paris and milano?
The company I work for makes a large part of it's revenue (many millions) from the ability to search and contextualise old news.
Dude, you must be a troll, but I'll bite. That is just such a load of bullshit, you could *never* be an IT consultant. First of all, if you are coding, you aren't a consultant - a consultant "consults" i.e. you advise the customer on the best course of action to achieve a certain goal. This may be architectural, infrastructure, security, or any other field, but it is *advise* - a good consultant is too *expensive* to be sitting there knocking out code. If your customer can afford to have you write (evidently crappy) code on his dime, you aren't a consultant, you are a tech/engineer, with delusions of grandeur.
Having said that, your attitude is simplistic, and hints of a general lack of intelligence. Whatever kind of engineer you think you may be, you suck at it. I can tell you this simply from looking at your post. Security should be a pervasive part of all you do, whether you are a dev, a server wrangler, or whatver. Saying "we don't have the knowledge or time to make sure its secure" is like a pilot saying "I don't know how close to ground I am, I'm busy enough keeping this plane in the air without having to worry abou...." Cue planecrash.
Place your code in escrow. That way your customer has the guarantee that even if you should go belly-up, they still have access to the code - which in commercial settings is usually the driver behind this. There are usually few other valid reasons (other then to just steal your work). We are in a similar position - medium size ASP doing business with very large global players, and thats how we deal with it.
yeah, I thought the same thing - TFA goes something like "I am going to compare and benchmark 3 things for you, except that I am not really going to compare one of them, but while we are on the subject, the one I can't compare for you sucks anyway". The conclusion is just as good: "You can either choose one, or the other. You should choose the one I did, because it r0x0rz and is only better at one thing, but you may want the other one, because my test show it is performs better. Also, theone like has no future." good effort....
MS is not being fined by the EU for being a monopolist, or for being a successful company, or anything of the sort. They are being fined because the EU made some specific demand, like - produce working, legible, understandable and implementable specifications for your interoperability protocol suite - CIFS etc. - and they refuse to do so, obfuscating everything.
The EU doesn't much care if every server in the EU is a windows server, but they do want to make that others have a chance of actually interoperating with those servers. Splitting up MS isn't going to achieve that, but fines will.
If you need WORM, it will usually be for compliance purposes. And if you need it for compliance purposes, the choice of filesystem simply isn't yours. Netapp, EMC, IBM and others all provide out-of-the-box WORM solutions for not to much money that are certified WORM devices - i.e. you can turn around to your local regulator with a piece of paper in your hand that proves your WORM is really WORM. From my experience with Netapp WORM devices, you are going to be stuck with XFS - incidentally, I spent a good portion of my time yesterday trying to recover from a broken XFS filesystem on a Netapp device, 4 day after our support contract ran out (isn't it always like that?) - trying to recover an XFS filesystem is like taking sandpaper to the platters......
Thanks for the tip - Unattended looks like a great toolset - I have been wanting to get my team off Ghost for a while now, and I'll get them to look into this.
Ask the Gartner Group. They have a (surprisingly, for them) insightful document called "Creating RFP's for fun and profit - Document ID R-950-131 It will only cost you $995 and will teach you *everything* you need to know about creating RFP's and executing on them. On any kind of sizable project the approach they suggest will save you between 20% to 45% in purchasing costs, and it will make sure all relevant stakeholders are included. Personally I believe Gartner are a bunch of wankers, too far stuck up their own arses, but this document is good. Get it.
Even a dual athlon (multi-core or not) is likely to have an internal NUMA architecture. I just bought some new servers that have exactly those properties.
Heh, a list of many complex actions involving different user ID's, directories and other computer "magic" as seen from a users perspective, followed by:
i s-so-cool-i-kick-your-ass stuff - I know, i use linux and firefox. but that still doesn't make it an easy install. The distro install, incidentally, is pretty easy though, so just wait for the vendor updates mmmkay?
"The install was as easy as anything packaged by Vise or InstallShield"
Can you please pass some of that crack you seem to be smoking? I'm a big linux fan, but installing anything, not in the least a user install from firefox, does not compare with the "double click setup.exe" from vise or installshield.
And before all the fanboys knee-jerk with the security/spyware/virus/whatever-my-linux-kung-fu-
...is hidden in the last paragraph:
What we really need from government is an investigation of the long-term effects of OSS on our indigenous software industry, assistance to combat the threat to the industry's livelihood that OSS might pose and the development of a strategy to build on the opportunities that OSS has created. Without prompt action, my fear is that a further move towards OSS could result in the nightmare scenario of OSS at one extreme and Microsoft at the other with nothing else in between. Where would our freedom of choice be then?
in other words: OSS is going to take away my gravy train!!
You are confusing issues. Publishing a link to someone's site (in the way /. and fark and many others do) is the way the web works. This is not what fuckrudders did - they simply presented the content as their own, without reference to the guy at all. They stole his content - bad enough in itself - and then also stole his bandwith while they were at it.
The guy is *totally* in his rights to change the content on his site to anything he likes, including pictures of slaughterhouses, if he desires to do so. Morevoer, he is totally in his rights to do this for a selective portion of his audience. He did nothing wrong! This is the way the internet works. You put things on the internet, people find them, link to them, you don't like some of the people linking to them, and so you replace it with something else.
You are seriously on the wrong side of this particular debate. Did something similar yourself, perhaps?
With my current car (a Mazda RX-8, incidentally) i have *never* ever used my key to unlock the door. I use my alarm fob for that.
Cite one other example of a space-going side mounted payload. Work out percentage of payloads travelling to space on top of a rocket vs. side mounted payloads. I read "Supposed to be" to mean "based on sound engineering and risk management principles" also know as "Common Sense" to some people.
I think the article is spot on, and the reporter is not confused about anything at all - the reporter is rightly asking what the valuation of the stock is really based on - reporter notes vague handwaving, a non-committal (beta) software stream, much, much rumours, and the fact that people at google like to eat. The reporter asks - in not so many words - how and when google will start delivering on that stock price - i.e. where google's *80 billion* valuation is hidden, and how, if at any time at all, this will be capitalised.
Google's success is not at doubt, rather, the reporter draws some subtle parallels to the dotcombusts of yesteryear, and hints at potential repetition and subsequent dissapointment of those times.
spamming on /.? thats brave....
This is so correct - a bank is not interested in seeing the law served, it is interested in seeing their business served. Those two are rarely the same. Probably some lame misguided attempt to just make the whole thing "go away"
I already get those at McDonalds today - who needs these acedemics to come up with this when you can just go out and buy it in the store?
rubbish - lets assume that a cinema-grade frame would take about 25 minutes to render, your 10gbps pipe to and from the supervisor isn't going to make much of a difference on the grand scale of things