I can't believe they're hitting on IRC. How behind the times is this?
Ahhh, I remember being a lad, hacking IRC chatrooms. Nothing like finding some chat room dedicated to evil wankers, escalating yourself to moderator, and booting everyone.
I agree that they probably won't leave it turned on.
However it is possible that you might be able to use some sort of metal detector to find the more unsusual components...The composition has to be completely different. There might be a weight difference as well.
Hmmmm. Those wall stud detetcors have a setting for detecting electrical current. That might pick up the battery...
Heh. I'd much rather spend my time trying to find a way to find it without drinking coke, than I would actually buying coke.
Depends on how bad it is. I've seen stuff that runs so slow there really isn't a way to throw more hardware at it. Of course that was written by a guy who had two goals: 1) to make sure no one but him could support his work, and 2) to do as little work as possible.
I don't know. Clean, elegant, functional code is beautiful. If you're ever going to have to work on it again, I think it's better for it to be clean and optimized.
Also depends on the size of the app. With a small app, what excuse do you have for not optimizing? Wouldn't take that long. With a big project? Depends on your work environment.
The bosses will never know if its optimal or not. If you tell them you've maxed out the server, they just think you write big badass code. A lot of times though, there isn't time to thoroughly bug check a big app (That what users are for, eh?), more less optimize it.
People keep saying that, but it's like saying English!=Writing/Composition, or Thought!=Thinking. Sure there's more to it than that, but without the expression, the theory is empty.
As for the "You're just a code monkey, all your jobs are going to India" argument, I'd advise you not to get too smug. I can always get a local job as an administrator; who is going to hire you to theorise for them when more innovative stuff starts coming from overseas? Don't think they can't do it...That's what all the engineers at GM thought about the Asians in 1980.
And, in conclusion, I actually have 7 years of school, and three pieces of paper, and the only thing this has bred in me is a disdain for people who believe that a few extra years and a few more pieces of paper make some sort of profound difference.
In the end it's just as likely that the guy who will have the brilliant, world changing idea will be a plumber, and we'll both be out of a job.
Spoken like a typical academic. If you don't learn it in a masters program or better, then it can't be learned. All people with Phd's code better than people with mere batchelors degrees. Yadda yadda yadda. In this field, my piece of paper is just as worthless as yours, so get off your high horse.
Most of those things are done by people in other fields with help from us "Code Monkeys" while people like him sit in academia and look down their noses at us for not being "Real" computer scientists.
Well, I was a philosophy/comp sci major with a double minor in physics and history, so I agree with you. But I think that those requirments ought to be outside of the major, in your divisional requirements, not inside your major. I'd even be fine with a mandatory science elective, just not mandatory chemistry.
My philosophy major required this one esoteric general math class, and I had to go through hell convincing them that there was no benefit in me taking a class which was effectively pre-calculus, when I'd already taken 5 classes of haigher math.
All this really stems from the fact that I don't really like chemistry, and wouldn't have liked having to take it.
I did big O until it was coming out my nose in college.
I think what I was trying to say is that, I don't find it helpful to sit down and work it out on paper, though I do find it useful in general for troubleshooting (Oh there's the problem, who put this recursion here? Its O(n^n) for Christs sake!).
The reason I ranted about that course was mainly the algorythmic proofing. The theory behind that was debunked in the early 80's (Some "proven" algorythms turned out not to work, while ones that had been proven NOT to work did), and it pissed me off having to learn it.
Certainly used that stuff a hell of a lot more than calculus.
Yea, so they know Chemistry. How does this help them in Comp Sci?
Physics, I buy. I took two years of physics. Understood why it was a REQUIRMENT, learned a lot.
Requirements for the major that have nothing to do with the major, however, are pointless. You're saying that every programmer needs knowledge of advanced Chemistry, and that is complete crap. Some schools require everyone to take chem, and thats fine with me, but don't add it to CS, because it has no place there.
I've got nothing against people who want to double up with CS and another science, and I bet someone who double majored in CS and Chem would be in high demand. But that shouldn't be shoved down your throat.
I loved Geometry! And Linear Algebra! I...I understood it, intuitively. Those were the only math courses where my intuitions actually helped me. Calc, even advanced algebra, man I had the worst problems.
I'll tell ya though, it was the Advanced Symbolic Logic (I was a philosophy major as well) that really helped me. All the places were most people fall back on their math, I fall back on my logic.
I always viewed flip-flops and other circuit logic stuff as being more apt for electrical engineering.
Sadly, because I love recursion (had to learn Scheme myself), it is almost never used in the real world. Slows down your code too much, and gobbles up a lot of memory.
And as for reasearch, you may come up with the idea, but someone who is better at programming and worse at math is the guy who is going to make it work.
I was a philosophy major specializing in logic. I actually did a double major in Philos and CS. Was going to go for cognitive science which is the place where the two meet, but I didn't care for all the neurophysiology.
Philosophy helped me a hell of a lot more on AI than the ability to run a Taylor series or do a Trig Integral ever did.
People keep talking graphics and sound. It's not all about that.
Heh. I tell ya, I hate hate hate math. Something in my brain is capable of inserting errors into any computation, no matter how simple.
On the other hand, I've always found math theory to be simple, which is great for programming, because I can code in the theory, and it can do the math. People used to always talk to me in Calc, because I programmed my calculator to do some really esoteric crap.
Programming for me is all about logic, and for some reason, the things that trip me up in actual math don't come into play there.
So no, I don't sit around doing the math. Wouldn't be any point in it for me. But if you know how it works and what things take more cpu cycles than others, you can usually tell how "weighty" the code is, just by reading through it.
I got into CS through Symbolic Logic, not through Math and Physics, so for me the true down and dirty is never going to happen. I'm never going to build a filesystem, or a super fast paging alogrythm, or a high framerate graphics application, or my own programming language.
But being good at making those things is not the only skillset useful in programming. When you're working with those things, rather than on them, its a whole different world, and I'd rather be doing something in it than theorizing about it.
There is a difference between writing clean efficient code and sitting down with a slide rule and working out the exact efficiency of 2000 lines of code.
I don't have anywhere near the math skills to do graphic work, so you've got me there, but thats a super specialized field.
Judging by the stuff I see every day, you're unusual. And I've worked on a few shrink-wrappers.
I've never worked on a major math project where I didn't have a math major doing all the equation work for me.
The sad truth of it is, Calc II isn't enough math to do most of the things they ask you to do, so unless you pursue extra math on your own, you're going to need help anyway.
It's been my experience that most programmers know something about math, and most math people know something about programming. I've never had much problem working with a math person. Much better than a lot of the other pure science types.
I feel sorry for the poor bastard who had to take Chem for a CS BS. What the hell?
I had to take Calc 1&2, Linear Algebra, Numerical Analysis, Comp Architecture, and Analysis of Algorythims. As well as Physics I&II
I have yet to use any of those. The only courses I have used were elective Stats and Probability modeling. The probablility stuff is all I ever use for AI.
90% at least of the math I took is worthless to me. I use integrals in woodworking more than I've ever used them in programming.
And analysis of algorythms? Does anyone still work out the efficiency of their algorythm by hand? I fiddle with mine like I'm working on a car...If I put this here, it goes faster, and if I change this to that, faster still. It's like compiler proofing your code...It made sense when it would take 20 hours to compile 200 lines of code, but these days its a joke! Just complile it, the compiler will throw the errors, and you've saved a huge amount of time.
It was a hell of a lot of stress for absolutely nothing.
Most firewalls these days are what they call "stateful" firewalls. What that means is, they block all incoming traffic on all blocked ports.
HOWEVER if a service running on your computer dials out to talk to another computer, they let the response (ESTABLISHED/RELATED) traffic back in. For example if you block SSH, you can still connect OUT to other computers.
So the port 9996 notify would still happen with most firewalls, even if you blocked that port. If they modified the FTP server, so that it went out and got the file instead of waiting, that would also pass a good number of firewalls.
Agree with you about 445 though. That should be explicitly dropped, and never allowed near the open net.
What you're saying is that the average computer owned by the average person is going to have those stats in 2 years.
You are out of your mind.
I don't dispute that those stats will exist, but I strongly dispute the assertion that the average person will feel the need to have a computer with them. We're not talking the average/.'er here, we're talking about everyday non-tech-obsessed people.
Hey, I have 25 open tabs right now. Why is that insane? Granted, Mozilla can't take it, so I use Galeon, which dones't go unstable for a good long while.
Microsoft rules as an employer. They treat their employees soooo well. I have some friends who work for them.
Me: "You work for the Evil Empire!"
Them: "Making half again as much as you, with software discounts, and more vacation, and shiny work environment, and better equipment, and better bosses, and..."
Ever buy the Sunday paper? First thing you do is dump the 8 pounds of glossy color ads in the nearest garbage can. Everyone knows this, but the advertisers still line up every week to pay for their ads to end up in a landfill.
The same is true with internet ads...They have to pay by click or view or something. There isn't any way around it, that's how all adds are sold.
Slashdot Mirror
Heh, download it now, because you KNOW Microsoft is going to be pissed.
I can't believe they're hitting on IRC. How behind the times is this?
Ahhh, I remember being a lad, hacking IRC chatrooms. Nothing like finding some chat room dedicated to evil wankers, escalating yourself to moderator, and booting everyone.
Simple pleasures.
I agree that they probably won't leave it turned on.
However it is possible that you might be able to use some sort of metal detector to find the more unsusual components...The composition has to be completely different. There might be a weight difference as well.
Hmmmm. Those wall stud detetcors have a setting for detecting electrical current. That might pick up the battery...
Heh. I'd much rather spend my time trying to find a way to find it without drinking coke, than I would actually buying coke.
Depends on how bad it is. I've seen stuff that runs so slow there really isn't a way to throw more hardware at it. Of course that was written by a guy who had two goals: 1) to make sure no one but him could support his work, and 2) to do as little work as possible.
I don't know. Clean, elegant, functional code is beautiful. If you're ever going to have to work on it again, I think it's better for it to be clean and optimized.
Also depends on the size of the app. With a small app, what excuse do you have for not optimizing? Wouldn't take that long. With a big project? Depends on your work environment.
The bosses will never know if its optimal or not. If you tell them you've maxed out the server, they just think you write big badass code. A lot of times though, there isn't time to thoroughly bug check a big app (That what users are for, eh?), more less optimize it.
People keep saying that, but it's like saying English!=Writing/Composition, or Thought!=Thinking. Sure there's more to it than that, but without the expression, the theory is empty.
As for the "You're just a code monkey, all your jobs are going to India" argument, I'd advise you not to get too smug. I can always get a local job as an administrator; who is going to hire you to theorise for them when more innovative stuff starts coming from overseas? Don't think they can't do it...That's what all the engineers at GM thought about the Asians in 1980.
And, in conclusion, I actually have 7 years of school, and three pieces of paper, and the only thing this has bred in me is a disdain for people who believe that a few extra years and a few more pieces of paper make some sort of profound difference.
In the end it's just as likely that the guy who will have the brilliant, world changing idea will be a plumber, and we'll both be out of a job.
Spoken like a typical academic. If you don't learn it in a masters program or better, then it can't be learned. All people with Phd's code better than people with mere batchelors degrees. Yadda yadda yadda. In this field, my piece of paper is just as worthless as yours, so get off your high horse.
Most of those things are done by people in other fields with help from us "Code Monkeys" while people like him sit in academia and look down their noses at us for not being "Real" computer scientists.
It's still nice to see a large non-tech organization come out and say, "Hey, this is crap."
Now if the courts will do it and slap them with a $699 fine for every false claim they've ever made, I'll die a happy puppy.
Well, I was a philosophy/comp sci major with a double minor in physics and history, so I agree with you. But I think that those requirments ought to be outside of the major, in your divisional requirements, not inside your major. I'd even be fine with a mandatory science elective, just not mandatory chemistry.
My philosophy major required this one esoteric general math class, and I had to go through hell convincing them that there was no benefit in me taking a class which was effectively pre-calculus, when I'd already taken 5 classes of haigher math.
All this really stems from the fact that I don't really like chemistry, and wouldn't have liked having to take it.
I did big O until it was coming out my nose in college.
I think what I was trying to say is that, I don't find it helpful to sit down and work it out on paper, though I do find it useful in general for troubleshooting (Oh there's the problem, who put this recursion here? Its O(n^n) for Christs sake!).
The reason I ranted about that course was mainly the algorythmic proofing. The theory behind that was debunked in the early 80's (Some "proven" algorythms turned out not to work, while ones that had been proven NOT to work did), and it pissed me off having to learn it.
Certainly used that stuff a hell of a lot more than calculus.
Yea, so they know Chemistry. How does this help them in Comp Sci?
Physics, I buy. I took two years of physics. Understood why it was a REQUIRMENT, learned a lot.
Requirements for the major that have nothing to do with the major, however, are pointless. You're saying that every programmer needs knowledge of advanced Chemistry, and that is complete crap. Some schools require everyone to take chem, and thats fine with me, but don't add it to CS, because it has no place there.
I've got nothing against people who want to double up with CS and another science, and I bet someone who double majored in CS and Chem would be in high demand. But that shouldn't be shoved down your throat.
I loved Geometry! And Linear Algebra! I...I understood it, intuitively. Those were the only math courses where my intuitions actually helped me. Calc, even advanced algebra, man I had the worst problems.
I'll tell ya though, it was the Advanced Symbolic Logic (I was a philosophy major as well) that really helped me. All the places were most people fall back on their math, I fall back on my logic.
I always viewed flip-flops and other circuit logic stuff as being more apt for electrical engineering.
Sadly, because I love recursion (had to learn Scheme myself), it is almost never used in the real world. Slows down your code too much, and gobbles up a lot of memory.
Useful = Grad work? Not sure about that one.
And as for reasearch, you may come up with the idea, but someone who is better at programming and worse at math is the guy who is going to make it work.
HA! Yes!
I was a philosophy major specializing in logic. I actually did a double major in Philos and CS. Was going to go for cognitive science which is the place where the two meet, but I didn't care for all the neurophysiology.
Philosophy helped me a hell of a lot more on AI than the ability to run a Taylor series or do a Trig Integral ever did.
People keep talking graphics and sound. It's not all about that.
Heh. I tell ya, I hate hate hate math. Something in my brain is capable of inserting errors into any computation, no matter how simple.
On the other hand, I've always found math theory to be simple, which is great for programming, because I can code in the theory, and it can do the math. People used to always talk to me in Calc, because I programmed my calculator to do some really esoteric crap.
Programming for me is all about logic, and for some reason, the things that trip me up in actual math don't come into play there.
So no, I don't sit around doing the math. Wouldn't be any point in it for me. But if you know how it works and what things take more cpu cycles than others, you can usually tell how "weighty" the code is, just by reading through it.
I got into CS through Symbolic Logic, not through Math and Physics, so for me the true down and dirty is never going to happen. I'm never going to build a filesystem, or a super fast paging alogrythm, or a high framerate graphics application, or my own programming language.
But being good at making those things is not the only skillset useful in programming. When you're working with those things, rather than on them, its a whole different world, and I'd rather be doing something in it than theorizing about it.
There is a difference between writing clean efficient code and sitting down with a slide rule and working out the exact efficiency of 2000 lines of code.
I don't have anywhere near the math skills to do graphic work, so you've got me there, but thats a super specialized field.
Judging by the stuff I see every day, you're unusual. And I've worked on a few shrink-wrappers.
I've never worked on a major math project where I didn't have a math major doing all the equation work for me.
The sad truth of it is, Calc II isn't enough math to do most of the things they ask you to do, so unless you pursue extra math on your own, you're going to need help anyway.
It's been my experience that most programmers know something about math, and most math people know something about programming. I've never had much problem working with a math person. Much better than a lot of the other pure science types.
I feel sorry for the poor bastard who had to take Chem for a CS BS. What the hell?
I had to take Calc 1&2, Linear Algebra, Numerical Analysis, Comp Architecture, and Analysis of Algorythims. As well as Physics I&II
I have yet to use any of those. The only courses I have used were elective Stats and Probability modeling. The probablility stuff is all I ever use for AI.
90% at least of the math I took is worthless to me. I use integrals in woodworking more than I've ever used them in programming.
And analysis of algorythms? Does anyone still work out the efficiency of their algorythm by hand? I fiddle with mine like I'm working on a car...If I put this here, it goes faster, and if I change this to that, faster still. It's like compiler proofing your code...It made sense when it would take 20 hours to compile 200 lines of code, but these days its a joke! Just complile it, the compiler will throw the errors, and you've saved a huge amount of time.
It was a hell of a lot of stress for absolutely nothing.
Most firewalls these days are what they call "stateful" firewalls. What that means is, they block all incoming traffic on all blocked ports.
HOWEVER if a service running on your computer dials out to talk to another computer, they let the response (ESTABLISHED/RELATED) traffic back in. For example if you block SSH, you can still connect OUT to other computers.
So the port 9996 notify would still happen with most firewalls, even if you blocked that port. If they modified the FTP server, so that it went out and got the file instead of waiting, that would also pass a good number of firewalls.
Agree with you about 445 though. That should be explicitly dropped, and never allowed near the open net.
What you're saying is that the average computer owned by the average person is going to have those stats in 2 years.
/.'er here, we're talking about everyday non-tech-obsessed people.
You are out of your mind.
I don't dispute that those stats will exist, but I strongly dispute the assertion that the average person will feel the need to have a computer with them. We're not talking the average
Hey, I have 25 open tabs right now. Why is that insane? Granted, Mozilla can't take it, so I use Galeon, which dones't go unstable for a good long while.
Microsoft rules as an employer. They treat their employees soooo well. I have some friends who work for them.
Me: "You work for the Evil Empire!"
Them: "Making half again as much as you, with software discounts, and more vacation, and shiny work environment, and better equipment, and better bosses, and..."
Me: "I hate you."
Ever buy the Sunday paper? First thing you do is dump the 8 pounds of glossy color ads in the nearest garbage can. Everyone knows this, but the advertisers still line up every week to pay for their ads to end up in a landfill.
The same is true with internet ads...They have to pay by click or view or something. There isn't any way around it, that's how all adds are sold.
At least we've finally outsourced a crappy job.