"The whole point of using and programming computers is to automate...."
So you're saying that nothing has happened on computers that did not exist before? All we do is to automate tasks that are already performed by humans or machines?
God, that sentence makes me so angry that I'll go and play Tetris for a while (instead of Tali).
I don't have too big a problem with both of the last two options. I run a HP printer/scanner/copier and it worked right after plugging in the USB cable. Way to go HP/Ubuntu. Installing Java was also a breeze, I've now added the JDK as well. I do agree with the power safe options. They simply do not work as wanted. Then again, I am running it on a VIA EPIA fanless motherboard, and it seems not all hardware is supported as well as it could be. No crypto functionality, and I've got some serious USB issues when I shut down the computer (which it won't do, shutting down completely) and when it goes into any power safe mode. But after enjoying digital audio, gigabit network, firewire, USB-2, PATA, serial ATA, printer functionality etc. ect. out of the box, you won't hear me complain to soon. It even does some 3D after installing some additional stuff. The 3D is rather unstable though.
Fortunately it was always meant to be an always on machine, it does not consume power. But the power management in Linux always has been sub-par when compared against Windows. This is especially annoying when running it on a laptop, but it gets increasingly important on desktops as well. Of course, Windows has got it easy. No laptop maker will deliver a laptop without testing the power management on the Windows version they are delivering it with. I'm not so sure that a mere distribution will solve these problems though. You need full functioning drivers and bug-free hardware to have full ACPI support. Something that seems to be hard to do, even on Windows.
They've got their uses. If I look for a problem specific to a version of Ubuntu, the Google searches are much more precise than when I just use the version number.
Re:GWT *and* Java
on
GWT in Action
·
· Score: 2, Informative
I *knew* I was too tired to write this reply. Google Web Toolkit it is. Are there any slashdottees that would like to proofread my replies?
Nah, didn't think so:)
GWT *and* Java
on
GWT in Action
·
· Score: 4, Informative
I would like to point out that the GWT can also be used from a Java server application. I'm using a package from Instantiations, WindowBuilder Pro, that can generate Swing (default Java GUI), SWT (IBM/Eclipse GUI) as well as the Google Window Toolkit. It's an application/plugin for creating graphical interfaces, so you would probably not get too exposed to the GWT itself. I haven't yet tried it out, but it might be a good idea to start of with a GUI builder and only delve deeper when needed. Of course, understanding what happens is great when you need to debug something, or if you are not happy with the functionality. But I would not start off by writing web-pages when trying out this relatively new technology.
Before somebody grills me, the version of WindowBuilder Pro that I am using is a bit unstable and crashes Eclipse now and then. Lots of memory is also recommended (then again, if you are a developer, you need lots of memory anyway).
"and they quite working of the wrong JRE is present - period"
It's "quit working". I now see why I get confused with your sentences. Please read them before posting. I'm very interesting in the applications you are running, they don't seem normal Java apps to me. Of course, if you install an *older* Java VM than a product is written for, it won't work.
"These have to run under windows, incidentally, and will absolutely not run under anything else."
Very *very* special Java apps.
"And, yes, it would be great if Sun can out with a JRE you could install what would run older versions of Java."
What the heck are you talking about, a JRE that can run older versions of Java? Jeez, they have class compatibility up to the first versions of 1.1. Only in 1.6 they decided to really deprecate a few of the first "deprecated versions". Besides, the JRE *is* Java. How can you run an older version of Java in Java? Well, I'm sure I don't know.
"Some of them have to do with security monitoring agreements with clients. If I install another JRE that breaks a java product, the SLA is in breech."
Then your suppliers are completely brain-dead. As said, if they *really really* want to run a specific JVM, install them in a separate folder, or make sure that the correct VM is called from an.exe and you're all set.
It seems you are more suffering from exceptionally stupid suppliers and bad products instead of Java. Stupidity cannot be avoided by using Java. It might be used to hide it, but that's another matter.
Would holding the power button for 5 seconds alert the root kit? Because that's what I normally recommend instead of pulling the plug. It would be a shame to damage the power supply just to shut down the computer.
"Actually, when someone tries to sell me a product by pointing out that its done in java, I have to politely see them to the door."
That's just stupid, Java has many features that are also interesting if you buy a product. It's just much easier to write a bug free product based on Java than, e.g. a C++ application. You could use C# but.NET is definitely less stable in my opinion, especially across different versions.
"I already have several commercial Java products which require a specific JRE versions, and installing a newer JRE often breaks one of them (they'll check to see of other JRE versions are present, and decide not to run for compatibility reasons)."
Sometimes you see that these products have been tested specifically on a JRE or JDK version. This happens with qualified software. There are very few compatibility problems between versions of Java; many 1.1 applications still run fine on 1.6 or 1.7. But vendors are sometimes (over) careful. Then they just bundle the JRE that the application was compiled for. Not such a problem if you have a big standalone application, but it can be a nuisance. Then again, C++ vendors just bundle a load of DLL's. While this takes less disk space it is essentially the same thing. And who cares about disk space (for applications) anymore?
"I have to be able to run them to meet client SLA requirements."
I do not understand that sentence. What do you have to run to meet client SLA requirements? The specific Java version? What's against that?
"So, because java is not compatible with itself, the only response I can give to the "and its done in java" selling point is "sorry to hear that"."
Thats taking it way to far. Any set of libraries is (slightly) incompatible with itself, and Java is doing a great job. Sun and the JCP do a great job in protecting against compatibility problems. As said, the other Java features should also be taken in account as well.
"While there are workarounds to the java self-incompatibility problems, they're not worth it. The only other really satisfactory solution is to run a VM for each version of java needed. Also not worth the effort."
That's taking it *way* to far. I've run an endless list of Java applications, and yes, I've seen incompatibilities. Some XML digital signature problems, some SWT Swing incompatibilities, and a JVM that had broken threading and could kill Swing (the worst bug so far in my opinion, the author of it apologized publicly for that one).
Run a VM for each version of Java needed? What do you mean? Don't you always have a VM per process?
"Does Sun have some kind of solution to java?"
And, finally, that's called trolling.
Re:Grammar flames are legit for published articles
on
Network Warrior
·
· Score: 1
Because the average C++ error reporting is so bad that you feel sorry for its own inability to write something useful?
It seems that the cipher (as in: cryptographic algorithm) is broken. It's not even "has been broken" because if it is broken now, it was broken yesterday. If it is indeed a XOR method, it has been known to be broken for a while. I think the author meant determining the value of a key for a car using a new, faster method to do so. The title is therefore rather wrong. Oh, and I've always understood that it should be "a cipher of a car" instead of "a car's cipher", but maybe that's only true for old style English.
Why am I even bothering to post this? Oh well, I've got karma to burn anyway. It *is* nothing less than the title of the summary, so maybe that's what triggered me.
Ugh, there are definitely too little details in the PDF and the web-page - which makes it hard to read, and I have been playing with crypto all day already. It now seems to me that you need enough car keys to get to the master key, which would create instantaneous access. But that's a lot of work. The cracking of the car key takes one hour worth of data and "less than a day" of crypto-analysis (or is this the 5 minutes talked about in the PDF? It would seem that this is the case). Phew, hope we can view the full, edited article soon.
Ok, interesting post, but why wasn't the master key posted? I want to make a legit copy of the key of my neighb^h^h^h^h^h^hjaquar. Without it, no 65 minute crack...
Read the article. There is a master key that takes a lot of time to be found, but once found, you can easily deduct the derived key for the car - that is, if you obtain enough plain text. The reason that this can be done is because they are using a XOR based cipher, which is as insecure as hell. If they had used 3DES or AES, or any relatively safe cipher, this cannot happen. Problem is that these chips are designed to be cheap and to use next to n power. Hope this clears it up.
Ok, the first person that gets the bright idea to actually look at the packets and the timing of the packets on the network gets a cookie. Even though I suspect that the context switching might be the issue, I would like to see someone checking what goes on on the network. Differences between acknowledge packets being sent for instance.
So? As long as the articles are interesting enough and not trolls by themselves. I think that the idea that DRM is causing this is highly unlikely though, so some of the responses are a bit sensationalist. Currently my money is on the switching between kernel and user processes, as I recall that the audio drivers are now user processes indeed.
If it is a flaw in the self-healing mechanism, then I don't know if this is such a good reason. A whole internet rebooting is something to be scared of though. I presume that can be helped by rebooting systems in some sort of time-schedule.
I think the "mono-culture" thing is an interesting argument, but nobody is going to add or change operating systems because of this reason. So the argument is mostly academic. Furthermore, to solve this problem, you would need to replace the Skype mono-culture, not the Windows mono-culture.
: a word (as NATO, radar, or laser) formed from the initial letter or letters of each of the successive parts or major parts of a compound term; also : an abbreviation (as FBI) formed from initial letters : INITIALISM
So, why would you need to be able to pronounce the acronym as a word? The "also" seems to cover this nicely. "abbreviation" does not seem to cover it. You could call it "initialism" of course, but I think the rest of the cowboys here would not like it.
I know that Paris already has many fibers and other cables running through their sewer system. Then again, these are rather ancient, large sewer systems. I've seen a video where they also place wifi within the sewer system even.
I won't argue on that, you got right to the point. Nowadays I do sometimes program "out of hand". The thing is, if the software is small enough, or when there is time to redo from start, programming out of hand makes some sense. This is also the major reason why I am not programming (supporting, but not programming) open source solutions. The reason is that the design is not really available most of the time, and it takes way to much time to figure everything out from source. I know there are people that can easily do that, I'm just not one of them.
Those "highly important security-bugs" will most likely be found in OS or server components. Sure, that's a lot of software, but they aren't general purpose applications. I tried to exclude those products by writing "undemanding applications" and "memory leak or buffer overflow in a graphics application". So either I was still not clear enough or you were misunderstanding me for some other reason.
Buffer overflows and such tend to not surface in normal applications, because you would have to go out of your way to exploit them or find them during testing, and then gain nothing at all. Of course, underlying libraries such as JPEG software might be used by either OS or application software, so general purpose libraries should be rather bug-free or they could cause serious problems (such as in Java or in browsers).
Many software products contain many bugs. Because software systems contain so many source code lines, you are almost certain that there are bugs. This is especially true if languages like C++ are used to create relatively undemanding applications. Many upon many of these bugs will never show up, if they were, they would have been discovered during testing. And if they show up, they may not do much harm. For example, a memory leak or buffer overflow in a graphics application won't matter too much.
I don't think that this goes for physical products as much. If there is a weak point in a kiddie toy, it might break the product, or a piece of product could be swallowed (ugh, just thought about the Simpsons: could somebody please think about the children?!). Also, if a bug in a software product gets exploited, it can still be fixed afterwards. Sure, the bug does some damage, but it might be much more economical this way.
Of course, there is one serious problem with this scheme: manufacturers won't be pushed to create better, more bug free products. Then again, too much exposure of bugs to the buying public might, and you might piss off existing customers as well. You can see this is happening in this case. Maybe the programmer that created the bugs will be more closely monitored or will have to create a unit test or two more for his next project.
A company consists of its employees. The thing about wikipedia of course is that it would treat any worker at the same level. A disgruntled programmer has the same level as the person responsible for the PR.
Please do not edit articles about the company though. You might think of them as defamatory. Maybe it would be better to show somebody else the problem and ask them to look into it. Or, even better, show it to the PR department and let them contact an editor about it. If you change the article, be honest and say that you belong to the company. There's no shame in that. Just let them see that the company thinks differently about the issue.
Because you *will* be biased if you work for the company. I've found out that I am pretty biased in favor of my company, even though its far from perfect.
Slashdot Mirror
"The whole point of using and programming computers is to automate...."
So you're saying that nothing has happened on computers that did not exist before? All we do is to automate tasks that are already performed by humans or machines?
God, that sentence makes me so angry that I'll go and play Tetris for a while (instead of Tali).
I don't have too big a problem with both of the last two options. I run a HP printer/scanner/copier and it worked right after plugging in the USB cable. Way to go HP/Ubuntu. Installing Java was also a breeze, I've now added the JDK as well. I do agree with the power safe options. They simply do not work as wanted. Then again, I am running it on a VIA EPIA fanless motherboard, and it seems not all hardware is supported as well as it could be. No crypto functionality, and I've got some serious USB issues when I shut down the computer (which it won't do, shutting down completely) and when it goes into any power safe mode. But after enjoying digital audio, gigabit network, firewire, USB-2, PATA, serial ATA, printer functionality etc. ect. out of the box, you won't hear me complain to soon. It even does some 3D after installing some additional stuff. The 3D is rather unstable though.
Fortunately it was always meant to be an always on machine, it does not consume power. But the power management in Linux always has been sub-par when compared against Windows. This is especially annoying when running it on a laptop, but it gets increasingly important on desktops as well. Of course, Windows has got it easy. No laptop maker will deliver a laptop without testing the power management on the Windows version they are delivering it with. I'm not so sure that a mere distribution will solve these problems though. You need full functioning drivers and bug-free hardware to have full ACPI support. Something that seems to be hard to do, even on Windows.
They've got their uses. If I look for a problem specific to a version of Ubuntu, the Google searches are much more precise than when I just use the version number.
I *knew* I was too tired to write this reply. Google Web Toolkit it is. Are there any slashdottees that would like to proofread my replies?
:)
Nah, didn't think so
I would like to point out that the GWT can also be used from a Java server application. I'm using a package from Instantiations, WindowBuilder Pro, that can generate Swing (default Java GUI), SWT (IBM/Eclipse GUI) as well as the Google Window Toolkit. It's an application/plugin for creating graphical interfaces, so you would probably not get too exposed to the GWT itself. I haven't yet tried it out, but it might be a good idea to start of with a GUI builder and only delve deeper when needed. Of course, understanding what happens is great when you need to debug something, or if you are not happy with the functionality. But I would not start off by writing web-pages when trying out this relatively new technology.
Before somebody grills me, the version of WindowBuilder Pro that I am using is a bit unstable and crashes Eclipse now and then. Lots of memory is also recommended (then again, if you are a developer, you need lots of memory anyway).
In other news, farmers are complaining about the high farm land prices in mid-town New York.
"and they quite working of the wrong JRE is present - period"
.exe and you're all set.
It's "quit working". I now see why I get confused with your sentences. Please read them before posting. I'm very interesting in the applications you are running, they don't seem normal Java apps to me. Of course, if you install an *older* Java VM than a product is written for, it won't work.
"These have to run under windows, incidentally, and will absolutely not run under anything else."
Very *very* special Java apps.
"And, yes, it would be great if Sun can out with a JRE you could install what would run older versions of Java."
What the heck are you talking about, a JRE that can run older versions of Java? Jeez, they have class compatibility up to the first versions of 1.1. Only in 1.6 they decided to really deprecate a few of the first "deprecated versions". Besides, the JRE *is* Java. How can you run an older version of Java in Java? Well, I'm sure I don't know.
"Some of them have to do with security monitoring agreements with clients. If I install another JRE that breaks a java product, the SLA is in breech."
Then your suppliers are completely brain-dead. As said, if they *really really* want to run a specific JVM, install them in a separate folder, or make sure that the correct VM is called from an
It seems you are more suffering from exceptionally stupid suppliers and bad products instead of Java. Stupidity cannot be avoided by using Java. It might be used to hide it, but that's another matter.
Would holding the power button for 5 seconds alert the root kit? Because that's what I normally recommend instead of pulling the plug. It would be a shame to damage the power supply just to shut down the computer.
"Actually, when someone tries to sell me a product by pointing out that its done in java, I have to politely see them to the door."
.NET is definitely less stable in my opinion, especially across different versions.
That's just stupid, Java has many features that are also interesting if you buy a product. It's just much easier to write a bug free product based on Java than, e.g. a C++ application. You could use C# but
"I already have several commercial Java products which require a specific JRE versions, and installing a newer JRE often breaks one of them (they'll check to see of other JRE versions are present, and decide not to run for compatibility reasons)."
Sometimes you see that these products have been tested specifically on a JRE or JDK version. This happens with qualified software. There are very few compatibility problems between versions of Java; many 1.1 applications still run fine on 1.6 or 1.7. But vendors are sometimes (over) careful. Then they just bundle the JRE that the application was compiled for. Not such a problem if you have a big standalone application, but it can be a nuisance. Then again, C++ vendors just bundle a load of DLL's. While this takes less disk space it is essentially the same thing. And who cares about disk space (for applications) anymore?
"I have to be able to run them to meet client SLA requirements."
I do not understand that sentence. What do you have to run to meet client SLA requirements? The specific Java version? What's against that?
"So, because java is not compatible with itself, the only response I can give to the "and its done in java" selling point is "sorry to hear that"."
Thats taking it way to far. Any set of libraries is (slightly) incompatible with itself, and Java is doing a great job. Sun and the JCP do a great job in protecting against compatibility problems. As said, the other Java features should also be taken in account as well.
"While there are workarounds to the java self-incompatibility problems, they're not worth it. The only other really satisfactory solution is to run a VM for each version of java needed. Also not worth the effort."
That's taking it *way* to far. I've run an endless list of Java applications, and yes, I've seen incompatibilities. Some XML digital signature problems, some SWT Swing incompatibilities, and a JVM that had broken threading and could kill Swing (the worst bug so far in my opinion, the author of it apologized publicly for that one).
Run a VM for each version of Java needed? What do you mean? Don't you always have a VM per process?
"Does Sun have some kind of solution to java?"
And, finally, that's called trolling.
Because the average C++ error reporting is so bad that you feel sorry for its own inability to write something useful?
It seems that the cipher (as in: cryptographic algorithm) is broken. It's not even "has been broken" because if it is broken now, it was broken yesterday. If it is indeed a XOR method, it has been known to be broken for a while. I think the author meant determining the value of a key for a car using a new, faster method to do so. The title is therefore rather wrong. Oh, and I've always understood that it should be "a cipher of a car" instead of "a car's cipher", but maybe that's only true for old style English.
Why am I even bothering to post this? Oh well, I've got karma to burn anyway. It *is* nothing less than the title of the summary, so maybe that's what triggered me.
Ugh, there are definitely too little details in the PDF and the web-page - which makes it hard to read, and I have been playing with crypto all day already. It now seems to me that you need enough car keys to get to the master key, which would create instantaneous access. But that's a lot of work. The cracking of the car key takes one hour worth of data and "less than a day" of crypto-analysis (or is this the 5 minutes talked about in the PDF? It would seem that this is the case). Phew, hope we can view the full, edited article soon.
Ok, interesting post, but why wasn't the master key posted? I want to make a legit copy of the key of my neighb^h^h^h^h^h^hjaquar. Without it, no 65 minute crack...
Read the article. There is a master key that takes a lot of time to be found, but once found, you can easily deduct the derived key for the car - that is, if you obtain enough plain text. The reason that this can be done is because they are using a XOR based cipher, which is as insecure as hell. If they had used 3DES or AES, or any relatively safe cipher, this cannot happen. Problem is that these chips are designed to be cheap and to use next to n power. Hope this clears it up.
If you think that Linus did not know that, I think you don't know Linus.
Fine with me, the first one to solve the power safe/shutdown issues with my VIA EPIA USB drivers wins.
Ok, the first person that gets the bright idea to actually look at the packets and the timing of the packets on the network gets a cookie. Even though I suspect that the context switching might be the issue, I would like to see someone checking what goes on on the network. Differences between acknowledge packets being sent for instance.
So? As long as the articles are interesting enough and not trolls by themselves. I think that the idea that DRM is causing this is highly unlikely though, so some of the responses are a bit sensationalist. Currently my money is on the switching between kernel and user processes, as I recall that the audio drivers are now user processes indeed.
If it is a flaw in the self-healing mechanism, then I don't know if this is such a good reason. A whole internet rebooting is something to be scared of though. I presume that can be helped by rebooting systems in some sort of time-schedule.
I think the "mono-culture" thing is an interesting argument, but nobody is going to add or change operating systems because of this reason. So the argument is mostly academic. Furthermore, to solve this problem, you would need to replace the Skype mono-culture, not the Windows mono-culture.
Meriam Webster says:
: a word (as NATO, radar, or laser) formed from the initial letter or letters of each of the successive parts or major parts of a compound term; also : an abbreviation (as FBI) formed from initial letters : INITIALISM
So, why would you need to be able to pronounce the acronym as a word? The "also" seems to cover this nicely. "abbreviation" does not seem to cover it. You could call it "initialism" of course, but I think the rest of the cowboys here would not like it.
I know that Paris already has many fibers and other cables running through their sewer system. Then again, these are rather ancient, large sewer systems. I've seen a video where they also place wifi within the sewer system even.
I won't argue on that, you got right to the point. Nowadays I do sometimes program "out of hand". The thing is, if the software is small enough, or when there is time to redo from start, programming out of hand makes some sense. This is also the major reason why I am not programming (supporting, but not programming) open source solutions. The reason is that the design is not really available most of the time, and it takes way to much time to figure everything out from source. I know there are people that can easily do that, I'm just not one of them.
Those "highly important security-bugs" will most likely be found in OS or server components. Sure, that's a lot of software, but they aren't general purpose applications. I tried to exclude those products by writing "undemanding applications" and "memory leak or buffer overflow in a graphics application". So either I was still not clear enough or you were misunderstanding me for some other reason.
Buffer overflows and such tend to not surface in normal applications, because you would have to go out of your way to exploit them or find them during testing, and then gain nothing at all. Of course, underlying libraries such as JPEG software might be used by either OS or application software, so general purpose libraries should be rather bug-free or they could cause serious problems (such as in Java or in browsers).
I hope this makes things more clear for you.
Many software products contain many bugs. Because software systems contain so many source code lines, you are almost certain that there are bugs. This is especially true if languages like C++ are used to create relatively undemanding applications. Many upon many of these bugs will never show up, if they were, they would have been discovered during testing. And if they show up, they may not do much harm. For example, a memory leak or buffer overflow in a graphics application won't matter too much.
I don't think that this goes for physical products as much. If there is a weak point in a kiddie toy, it might break the product, or a piece of product could be swallowed (ugh, just thought about the Simpsons: could somebody please think about the children?!). Also, if a bug in a software product gets exploited, it can still be fixed afterwards. Sure, the bug does some damage, but it might be much more economical this way.
Of course, there is one serious problem with this scheme: manufacturers won't be pushed to create better, more bug free products. Then again, too much exposure of bugs to the buying public might, and you might piss off existing customers as well. You can see this is happening in this case. Maybe the programmer that created the bugs will be more closely monitored or will have to create a unit test or two more for his next project.
A company consists of its employees. The thing about wikipedia of course is that it would treat any worker at the same level. A disgruntled programmer has the same level as the person responsible for the PR.
Please do not edit articles about the company though. You might think of them as defamatory. Maybe it would be better to show somebody else the problem and ask them to look into it. Or, even better, show it to the PR department and let them contact an editor about it. If you change the article, be honest and say that you belong to the company. There's no shame in that. Just let them see that the company thinks differently about the issue.
Because you *will* be biased if you work for the company. I've found out that I am pretty biased in favor of my company, even though its far from perfect.