I'm glad you're bringing this up. I haven't seen any backup software that addresses bitrot. And bitrot does happen, I lost a few pics to it.
What I do:
I have a monthly script that makes a RAR archive from my pictures directory. RAR checks file integrity but also has "recovery" options that allow you to recover files from a damaged archive (to a point)
A few years ago a few towns in France started equipping public transportation vehicles with engines running on 'bio' fuels, based on beets, soy, cane sugar or other stuff. It turned out this scheme poluted more than classical fossil fuel because the demand for these vegetables involved an agriculture extremely intensive on fertilizers, which, at such dosage, create a considerable pollution.
I agree - and in overall Paul Davies' argumentation is weak in my opinion. To sum up, he says:
1) We should because finding life on Mars "would [...] represent a biological bonanza, enabling scientists to study two versions of evolution. The economic and practical benefits would be incalculable." - So you would do an expensive (financially and ethically) mission to Mars just for that *hypothesis* ? It would be a different story if it was a confirmed fact, but as of now, it is just a hypothesis;
2) He compares the risk involved with the ones special forces, test pilots or Antarctica explorers take. Theses people do have dangereous lives, but they don't intend to die. They take a *risk*, meaning there is a chance they die on the job. However, a one-way ticket to Mars is not a *risk*, it is an absolute guarantee that you'll die there!
3) He justifies the need for colonization because "during the next millennium there is a significant chance that civilization on Earth will be destroyed by an asteroid, a killer plague or a global war". False! asteroids and other geological catastrophes happen on the million of year scale, not over a millenium. And as for plague and wars, that's not a possible scenario for the future: it is the current situation in the world; we've been dealing with it since Eden, and we're still learning how to better deal with it. And as for the idea of occupying 2 planets in case one goes wrong, it would make more sense to develop an enclave, say in Antartica, or in the Himalayas, not on Mars.
I don't think his argumentation is valid in any point. His article remains interesting because it exposes the dream of space exploration, Marsian colonies, etc., and we all like these ideas. But our society has the duty to justify its action economically *and* ethically.
I like your argumentation, and I think I appreciate how Ada would be a good choice, but don't you think we would fall back to one of the current implementation (COBOL) main problem, that is, man power? I mean, the number of coders mastering Ada is certainly low, and depleting.
Good old tricks,
but I would just suggest the freeVNC instead of the quoted GoToMyPc.Com which costs $19.95/month. It has versions for PC, unix, PDAs, etc.
I agree if you end up *wanting* to become a manager. But what if you don't? Personally, I like development. I studied long to get a MS, and spent years developing sw architectures and processes, and now I'm 30, and I feel I'm on the down slope. But management doesn't sound good to me (and that's personal), if I wanted to be a manager I wouldn't have been a technical person during the last 15 years! It seems the only way up is actually a way out, for most of us. Only a very few stay technical, and they get jobs like head software architect.
I read once in a while stories about students having difficulties finding their 1st job in the IT industry, but from what I see around me, it also seems hard to keep your job when you pass, say, 40. My uncle was a damn good software engineer, but now that he's 50+, he has a hard time finding and keeping jobs. I'm not complaining for myself, I'm 30, with a good job, but I wonder, how long is it going to last? I think it's pretty sad to see a lot a sw engineers transitionning to management, not because they really like it, but because it's the accepted conventional way up. What if I love development and want to stay in it? And now, you tell us about mid-aged (and over) people *starting* a carrer in IT.. I don't know, but it looks like it's going to be tough for them.
But again, my view is totally biased by my personal environment and experience. I haven't checked any statistical resources out there (may be I should have before opening my big mouth:)
Mozilla is great with all its features, and the fact that it has a continuously updated bug list just shows it is evolving fast, and I think that's the major feature: the synergy of this product. That's what makes a product alive.
However, there is only one thing that I don't see addressed : the speed. From my personal experience, on a given machine, IE is faster than Mozilla, and as much as I love mozilla, I prefer to use IE because it's faster.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm glad you're bringing this up. I haven't seen any backup software that addresses bitrot. And bitrot does happen, I lost a few pics to it. What I do: I have a monthly script that makes a RAR archive from my pictures directory. RAR checks file integrity but also has "recovery" options that allow you to recover files from a damaged archive (to a point)
Nice, nice, but I don't see any trace of the Apollo 18 landing...
There's only one interview with Stroustrup that's worth reading: http://www.nsbasic.com/desktop/info/interview.shtml
Well yeah, bullets on the screen are secure:
http://www.bash.org/?244321 or cached:
http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:www.bash.org/%3F244321
How does this get moderated as 'funny' ? this is the most informative piece in the whole thread..
A few years ago a few towns in France started equipping public transportation vehicles with engines running on 'bio' fuels, based on beets, soy, cane sugar or other stuff. It turned out this scheme poluted more than classical fossil fuel because the demand for these vegetables involved an agriculture extremely intensive on fertilizers, which, at such dosage, create a considerable pollution.
I agree - and in overall Paul Davies' argumentation is weak in my opinion. To sum up, he says:
1) We should because finding life on Mars "would [...] represent a biological bonanza, enabling scientists to study two versions of evolution. The economic and practical benefits would be incalculable." - So you would do an expensive (financially and ethically) mission to Mars just for that *hypothesis* ? It would be a different story if it was a confirmed fact, but as of now, it is just a hypothesis;
2) He compares the risk involved with the ones special forces, test pilots or Antarctica explorers take. Theses people do have dangereous lives, but they don't intend to die. They take a *risk*, meaning there is a chance they die on the job. However, a one-way ticket to Mars is not a *risk*, it is an absolute guarantee that you'll die there!
3) He justifies the need for colonization because "during the next millennium there is a significant chance that civilization on Earth will be destroyed by an asteroid, a killer plague or a global war". False! asteroids and other geological catastrophes happen on the million of year scale, not over a millenium. And as for plague and wars, that's not a possible scenario for the future: it is the current situation in the world; we've been dealing with it since Eden, and we're still learning how to better deal with it. And as for the idea of occupying 2 planets in case one goes wrong, it would make more sense to develop an enclave, say in Antartica, or in the Himalayas, not on Mars.
I don't think his argumentation is valid in any point. His article remains interesting because it exposes the dream of space exploration, Marsian colonies, etc., and we all like these ideas. But our society has the duty to justify its action economically *and* ethically.
I like your argumentation,
and I think I appreciate how Ada would be a good choice, but don't you think we would fall back to one of the current implementation (COBOL) main problem, that is, man power? I mean, the number of coders mastering Ada is certainly low, and depleting.
Trying to get rid of COBOL because the number of COBOL coders is declining fast is one thing. Certainly a good thing.
.NET doesn't seem right to me. After all, Microsoft technologies change rapidly, and .NET will certainly disapear like all the rest.
But replacing it by
Replacing it with Java, or C, or C++, would seem - to me - a better guaranty.
Good old tricks,
but I would just suggest the free VNC instead of the quoted GoToMyPc.Com which costs $19.95/month.
It has versions for PC, unix, PDAs, etc.
I agree if you end up *wanting* to become a manager. But what if you don't? Personally, I like development. I studied long to get a MS, and spent years developing sw architectures and processes, and now I'm 30, and I feel I'm on the down slope. But management doesn't sound good to me (and that's personal), if I wanted to be a manager I wouldn't have been a technical person during the last 15 years! It seems the only way up is actually a way out, for most of us. Only a very few stay technical, and they get jobs like head software architect.
I read once in a while stories about students having difficulties finding their 1st job in the IT industry, but from what I see around me, it also seems hard to keep your job when you pass, say, 40. My uncle was a damn good software engineer, but now that he's 50+, he has a hard time finding and keeping jobs. I'm not complaining for myself, I'm 30, with a good job, but I wonder, how long is it going to last? I think it's pretty sad to see a lot a sw engineers transitionning to management, not because they really like it, but because it's the accepted conventional way up. What if I love development and want to stay in it?
:)
And now, you tell us about mid-aged (and over) people *starting* a carrer in IT.. I don't know, but it looks like it's going to be tough for them.
But again, my view is totally biased by my personal environment and experience. I haven't checked any statistical resources out there (may be I should have before opening my big mouth
Are you kidding? it's damn slow. IE is much faster. I mean, I agree Mozilla is cooler than IE, but the speed man, the speed!
Mozilla is great with all its features, and the fact that it has a continuously updated bug list just shows it is evolving fast, and I think that's the major feature: the synergy of this product. That's what makes a product alive.
However, there is only one thing that I don't see addressed : the speed. From my personal experience, on a given machine, IE is faster than Mozilla, and as much as I love mozilla, I prefer to use IE because it's faster.