a proper ACL implementation a-la Windows (don't laugh - they have a really good one)
Like hell they do. If there's a simple way to tell it "give (group) full control over this directory and everything underneath it", and not have it silently fail on certain branches, then please for God's sake tell me what it is?
Whether it's news or non-news, it has a misleading headline. You're over-complicating the issue by responding to a complaint other than the one that was actually put forth.
I don't use the preview pane, I like being able to able to read mails in a large window (whether it's separate (Thunderbird) or docked in the program (Eudora) doesn't matter to me).
How is a large docked window different from the preview pane?
I got a server from IbexPC.com a couple years back, and it's worked pretty well. It gets wonky if you eject a CD before shutting down the software reading it, but I rarely deal with CDs so it's not much of an issue for me. And the RPMs are a bit borked in Synaptic's eyes, but this is probably the fault of some early hack work on my part.
I've recently gotten a new corporate laptop, and Power User plus right-click-Run-As takes care of most things (ISTR Control Panel being wonky). Limited User is where the real industrial-grade suck is to be found.
his point is that users should't be educated because they should be educated before you hire them.
No, his point is that you shouldn't rely solely on education because it never works very well, and instead you should look into minimizing how much damage an uneducated user should do.
The internet will reduce the value of a good long-term memory significantly, because you can always look things up
Reduce, but by no means eliminate. A good long-term memory will let you remember things quicker than a lookup, and in more detail (important for processes, not important for simple facts like "in what year did X happen"). A good long-term memory for the outline of something will give you a better idea how to look up the details.
True - the challenging part is to come up with a definition of "participated" that everyone will be reasonably happy with, and that doesn't slow down the server too badly (MUDs generally don't have the luxury of a corporate-funded dedicated server farm). Amount of time spent, number of hits, amount of damage, whether it occurred early or late or throughout... The concern is that a would-be thief can hop on the bandwagon near the end of the fight, though this does at least require them to expose themselves to some amount of counterattack from the NPCs.
I used to staff on a MUD back in college. It was impossible to directly fight another PC (unless both had volunteered to participate in PVP) or mug them (unless you killed them first - see above). The tricky part was the Doctors profession (guild), who could turn invisible, but couldn't fight or pick things up at the same time - (presumably inspired by the Red Cross). One guy at my school came up with this bright idea:
Turn invisible
Camp someone else's fight
Turn visible, loot corpse, run away
Profit!
Of course, he had not volunteered for PVP, so everyone was pissed off that they couldn't go exact revenge in the obvious fashion.
I ended up tweaking the code so that looting someone else's corpse (defined as "they died less than X seconds ago and you didn't strike the killing blow") gave you a strike, and a certain number of strikes would automatically volunteer you for PVP whether you liked it or not. This let the players have fun trashing the guy, but also registered a lot of false positives from well-meaning teammates.
Many years later, I realized that from a purely technical standpoint, it would've been much easier to either make looting someone else's corpse (by the same definition as above) impossible, or convince the staffer who created the Doctors to take away invisibility. Not sure whether the players would've enjoyed those solutions more or less, overall.
I work for a consulting company that sells and supports another company's standard application, and adds custom code for clients who want it bad enough to pay for it. This has two major advantages:
No re-inventing wheels. Saves lots of time and money for both us and the client.
No debugging wheels. Client doesn't automatically blame every single problem on our coders. "Look, there are thousands of companies running this exact same thing - we didn't customize that part - so if there was a logic error, then all of them would have seen it and complained about it. It's much more likely that your network hiccuped in the middle of the update. Here's how we repair the damage, and here are some options for improving the network situation..."
Every time I want to reply to someone in gmail, it takes me at least 20 seconds to find the reply link.
It's right below the message, on the left. Okay, in this world of top-posters and inconsistent quoters and "this Yahoo group supported by blah blah" inline-spam, it'd be nice to have it replicated at the top of the message.
I want folders for my mail. I don't want to see a giant stream of everything. I like to see all related mail together in one place without being distracted by other stuff. To clean my inbox, I am forced to 'archive.' With a typical mail client, stuff I move to a new 'folder' (category in the gmail world) gets removed from my inbox. I like that because I keep all my actionable email in my inbox and move it when I'm done.
In my case, most of what goes to my Gmail account is mailing lists, which are easily covered by filters (add category X, skip inbox). You could also use an extra label for actionable items ("Starred" is basically a pre-fab version of such), which would take you from e.g. marking 90% of your mail as un-actionable to marking 10% as actionable. Okay, it'd be nice to have the option to auto-archive when adding certain labels.
When I'm looking for a specific email I remember getting about 4 days ago, I don't want to have to dig into the thread that started that conversation half a year ago because we know everyone likes to use the reply button to send email instead of composing fresh mail. My only other alternative is to use search, but that means I can't see other email that arrived around the same date because search only gives me what I looked for. Sometimes I remember getting an email from someone I don't know on the same day Doug replied to me about something related (he had referred them). So in a typical email client, I look for Doug's email from two weeks ago, and find that this other person's email sits about 5 lines away. In gmail, Doug's email is burried under an email from me! of all things, to him, that started last year... and after figuring that out and expanding all the different emails, I finally find the one I want and get the name of the person so I can run a stupid search for that person's email.
Try the "Has the words" search option. Okay, it'd be nice to have the option to un-group threads.
MSH by default on let digitally signed scripts to execute hence once infected scripts on execute.
Okay, the poor grammar here is actually significantly interfering with our ability to understand your intent. From context provided by other messages, I'm guessing you meant:
"MSH, by default, only lets digitally signed scripts execute; hence, once infected, scripts won't execute."
They should care about those things, as the reduced cost of ongoing maintenance may well pay for the added up-front cost several times over. Whether they actually do care, of course, is a much different question.
The question is whether one good programmer will do a better job than several mediocre ones. The non-obvious (to some) factor is that programming is more complex than, say, digging ditches or working on an assembly line - there are significant differences in quality of output, as opposed to merely rate of output.
Slashdot Mirror
Whether it's news or non-news, it has a misleading headline. You're over-complicating the issue by responding to a complaint other than the one that was actually put forth.
Orisinal has a few dozen neat little Flash games.
I got a server from IbexPC.com a couple years back, and it's worked pretty well. It gets wonky if you eject a CD before shutting down the software reading it, but I rarely deal with CDs so it's not much of an issue for me. And the RPMs are a bit borked in Synaptic's eyes, but this is probably the fault of some early hack work on my part.
As pointed out ad nauseum in another branch, no it isn't. Spread is, in fact, the square of the sine.
I've recently gotten a new corporate laptop, and Power User plus right-click-Run-As takes care of most things (ISTR Control Panel being wonky). Limited User is where the real industrial-grade suck is to be found.
Googling (of course) the last one turns up 3-4 third-party notifiers in the first set of results.
I'm not personally concerned with gmail contact list integration, but if I was, I'd want to see it in gaim.
Bit of a mixed blessing, though, seeing as they're mentioned in the context of "this is a steaming pile of crap".
Oh My God. And the monkey! Where does the monkey fit in?
= Amiga 85 :)
True - the challenging part is to come up with a definition of "participated" that everyone will be reasonably happy with, and that doesn't slow down the server too badly (MUDs generally don't have the luxury of a corporate-funded dedicated server farm). Amount of time spent, number of hits, amount of damage, whether it occurred early or late or throughout... The concern is that a would-be thief can hop on the bandwagon near the end of the fight, though this does at least require them to expose themselves to some amount of counterattack from the NPCs.
I used to staff on a MUD back in college. It was impossible to directly fight another PC (unless both had volunteered to participate in PVP) or mug them (unless you killed them first - see above). The tricky part was the Doctors profession (guild), who could turn invisible, but couldn't fight or pick things up at the same time - (presumably inspired by the Red Cross). One guy at my school came up with this bright idea:
Of course, he had not volunteered for PVP, so everyone was pissed off that they couldn't go exact revenge in the obvious fashion.
I ended up tweaking the code so that looting someone else's corpse (defined as "they died less than X seconds ago and you didn't strike the killing blow") gave you a strike, and a certain number of strikes would automatically volunteer you for PVP whether you liked it or not. This let the players have fun trashing the guy, but also registered a lot of false positives from well-meaning teammates.
Many years later, I realized that from a purely technical standpoint, it would've been much easier to either make looting someone else's corpse (by the same definition as above) impossible, or convince the staffer who created the Doctors to take away invisibility. Not sure whether the players would've enjoyed those solutions more or less, overall.
'find', while all kinds of weak compared to grep, is sufficient for some tasks.
"MSH, by default, only lets digitally signed scripts execute; hence, once infected, scripts won't execute."
They should care about those things, as the reduced cost of ongoing maintenance may well pay for the added up-front cost several times over. Whether they actually do care, of course, is a much different question.
The question is whether one good programmer will do a better job than several mediocre ones. The non-obvious (to some) factor is that programming is more complex than, say, digging ditches or working on an assembly line - there are significant differences in quality of output, as opposed to merely rate of output.
Funny yes, off-topic maybe, troll no.
Seconded!