You have a wonderful feeback loop on slashdot. Editors post an article about foobar. The article gets 437 comments; so clearly the community is interested in foobar, and might want to see more of them. Conversely, if only 23 comments are posted, maybe foobar just isn't a thing.
Of course you need to actually *read* some of the comments. If there are 437 comments, but 400 of them are "foobar sucks" and "why won't foobar die", maybe you *shouldn't* post more stories.
And, if an article gets pitifully few comments: look at the headline and description. Maybe it just wasn't written well enough to make people click. Hopefully you're already tracking editors by watching how many popular and how many stupid topics they post.
I had an electric Morgan years and years ago. Electric, in the sense that when the petrol engine died, I could put it in gear, and crank the electric starter motor to pull it up the drive and into the shed, so that I could investigate what went wrong this time.
When posting a story about some obscure software that nobody has heard of, how about a short description of what the heck it is? Readers should not need to break out Google to understand what you're talking about. This was covered this in Journalism 101.
You make that sound like a bad thing. Being essentially maintenance-free for 100,000 miles is far, far ahead of the industry average. There are two ways to have all components fail at the same time:
(a) measure the life span of the worst component. Cheapen every other part down to that standard.
(b) find the worst component, and make it better, so it lasts 100,000 miles. Repeat until the entire vehicle lasts that long.
We already have cars like this; one day past the warranty period, 30 things fail simultaneously. What you're saying is that, after walking the last mile home, we should walk into the house with a smile saying "Guess what, Honey! We need a new car! Isn't that great!"
So, let's be clear on this: their source code quality is SO crappy, that they can't recompile the 32-bit files in 64-bit and have them work.
The kernel can boot, so they've done all the ugly assembly bits; the fact that the rest won't run right means that the code implicitly assumes that pointers are 32 bit. Wonderful. What a great advance in technology. I'm sure that once they've worked through this issue, the rest of the code is 100% clean and bug free.
The 13" 256GB macbook pro is $1499. This one is $699. So, you could literally buy two of these for the price of one macbook. If you know of a comparable macbook for less than $750, please post.
I agree about Windows, but if I bought either this one or the macbook, as soon as I got home I'd format the disk and install Debian; so the stock OS doesn't matter.
Well I for one will buy more stuff from Newegg. When most other companies are just looking for the bottom line, NewEgg is actually working to make the world a better place.
So: no incoming bugs or feature requests, no merging other people's code, nobody pinging you every 5 minutes? Around here that's called "a day where I can be productive".
Even if you are using a source control system that *does* require a central repository to be up: since when did the inability to check in prevent you from writing and debugging code? If interacting with git/svn/clearcase/etc. is more than 0.1% of your work day, maybe you're not doing it right.
If source control being inaccessible means you get the day off.... let's just say that ClearCase users would be extremely happy.
No downloads for anything other than x86/64 and x86/32. That's what I meant by that.
Sure, in theory, I could download the sources and recompile them for my platforms of choice. But having that as a task before I can see whether Rust is usable in my environment? No, thanks.
But one thing which is very bad about c++ is that its very easy to write a bad program. In rust its very hard to write a bad program, as you first have to convince the compiler (including the borrow checker) to compile it, which requires you to think about what works how.
If they'd stop letting idiots work in computer science, we wouldn't need new languages. Good programmers don't write bad programs; they know what they want, and they know how to implement it. Heavens, you actually have to *think* while programming? The horrors!
Out of idle curiosity, I went to look at Rust. They don't even acknowledge that processors other than Intel X86 exist. So much for that.
Scanning only. It uses the real MAC address when connecting to a network.
No need for that on a public network, is there?
If this is a known network, connect using a 'real' MAC address. (Which doesn't need to be the hardware one, it just needs to be constant, so static IP assignment works). If this is an unknown network, just use a random MAC address - or else they'll track you.
When adding a network to your known list, it could give you the option to use the 'real' address, or continue to use a fake one.
A hash could be generated when the file is written. It would be generated by the file writer - if they're writing the file they know the contents, since they own the file.
Slashdot Mirror
This.
You have a wonderful feeback loop on slashdot. Editors post an article about foobar. The article gets 437 comments; so clearly the community is interested in foobar, and might want to see more of them. Conversely, if only 23 comments are posted, maybe foobar just isn't a thing.
Of course you need to actually *read* some of the comments. If there are 437 comments, but 400 of them are "foobar sucks" and "why won't foobar die", maybe you *shouldn't* post more stories.
And, if an article gets pitifully few comments: look at the headline and description. Maybe it just wasn't written well enough to make people click. Hopefully you're already tracking editors by watching how many popular and how many stupid topics they post.
I had an electric Morgan years and years ago. Electric, in the sense that when the petrol engine died, I could put it in gear, and crank the electric starter motor to pull it up the drive and into the shed, so that I could investigate what went wrong this time.
When posting a story about some obscure software that nobody has heard of, how about a short description of what the heck it is? Readers should not need to break out Google to understand what you're talking about. This was covered this in Journalism 101.
You make that sound like a bad thing. Being essentially maintenance-free for 100,000 miles is far, far ahead of the industry average. There are two ways to have all components fail at the same time:
(a) measure the life span of the worst component. Cheapen every other part down to that standard.
(b) find the worst component, and make it better, so it lasts 100,000 miles. Repeat until the entire vehicle lasts that long.
Given the choice, I'll buy the (b), thanks.
Blackberry still exists and has a hardware QERTY keyboard.
Ah, yes, That's the legendary Blackberry reliability for you.
We already have cars like this; one day past the warranty period, 30 things fail simultaneously. What you're saying is that, after walking the last mile home, we should walk into the house with a smile saying "Guess what, Honey! We need a new car! Isn't that great!"
They're designing a car that needs internet connectivity? This could bring a whole new meaning to the phrase "Dead Zone".
Kinda the Duke Nukem Forever of operating systems.
Well now that's just rude. Duke Nukem Forever did eventually get released.
Cygwin is possibly the worst piece of crap ever written. If you want Unix-like tools on Windows, try MKS Toolkit.
So, let's be clear on this: their source code quality is SO crappy, that they can't recompile the 32-bit files in 64-bit and have them work.
The kernel can boot, so they've done all the ugly assembly bits; the fact that the rest won't run right means that the code implicitly assumes that pointers are 32 bit. Wonderful. What a great advance in technology. I'm sure that once they've worked through this issue, the rest of the code is 100% clean and bug free.
The 13" 256GB macbook pro is $1499. This one is $699. So, you could literally buy two of these for the price of one macbook. If you know of a comparable macbook for less than $750, please post.
I agree about Windows, but if I bought either this one or the macbook, as soon as I got home I'd format the disk and install Debian; so the stock OS doesn't matter.
Maybe they counted the 350,000+ wannabees that walk around the shopping mall dressed in camo?
"firewall".... so it erects a wall of fire? Fund that sucker! Put one on the Mexican border!
Well I for one will buy more stuff from Newegg. When most other companies are just looking for the bottom line, NewEgg is actually working to make the world a better place.
So: no incoming bugs or feature requests, no merging other people's code, nobody pinging you every 5 minutes? Around here that's called "a day where I can be productive".
Even if you are using a source control system that *does* require a central repository to be up: since when did the inability to check in prevent you from writing and debugging code? If interacting with git/svn/clearcase/etc. is more than 0.1% of your work day, maybe you're not doing it right.
If source control being inaccessible means you get the day off.... let's just say that ClearCase users would be extremely happy.
With all the power of robotics, you've taken a task that takes a human less than five seconds, and reduced it to 1.2 seconds? Wow. I'm impressed.
Normal definition is 99 million years. So, no; most important IT invention is probably the digital computer.
https://www.rust-lang.org/down...
No downloads for anything other than x86/64 and x86/32. That's what I meant by that.
Sure, in theory, I could download the sources and recompile them for my platforms of choice. But having that as a task before I can see whether Rust is usable in my environment? No, thanks.
But one thing which is very bad about c++ is that its very easy to write a bad program. In rust its very hard to write a bad program, as you first have to convince the compiler (including the borrow checker) to compile it, which requires you to think about what works how.
If they'd stop letting idiots work in computer science, we wouldn't need new languages. Good programmers don't write bad programs; they know what they want, and they know how to implement it. Heavens, you actually have to *think* while programming? The horrors!
Out of idle curiosity, I went to look at Rust. They don't even acknowledge that processors other than Intel X86 exist. So much for that.
Since when is stability a feature? Isn't stability a basic requirement for software, especially in a programming language?
If it takes up to release 1.6 for things to become stable, I'm probably not interested.
Yeah, Google's hiring process has clearly failed. If your "idea" is just basic censorship, how do you rise to be a company director?
I was thinking more along the concept of tentacle rape.... a large organization screwing everyone within reach. Maybe it was a Freudian slip.
Scanning only. It uses the real MAC address when connecting to a network.
No need for that on a public network, is there?
If this is a known network, connect using a 'real' MAC address. (Which doesn't need to be the hardware one, it just needs to be constant, so static IP assignment works). If this is an unknown network, just use a random MAC address - or else they'll track you.
When adding a network to your known list, it could give you the option to use the 'real' address, or continue to use a fake one.
A hash could be generated when the file is written. It would be generated by the file writer - if they're writing the file they know the contents, since they own the file.