I've been thinking the same thing. Even on my home networks I have a standard iptables line on the OUTPUT chain which drops anything that doesn't have a valid -s just in case someone figures out a way to use my system to bounce their requests.
It would probably be "insightful" if I had left the word "Java" out.
Allow me to restate:
"Webapps, no matter what language they use, are the universe's way of sending everyone back to the 286 era of functionality and speed while allowing them to keep 32-bit color and sound."
Oh. And with prettier widgets and buttons and nifty-knobs and turney-dials and flashy-thingies.
You need to beat your users harder. Make them learn ftp. Tell them that if you wrote a click and drag application installer you'd be depriving them of the golden opportunity to learn.
How did the world put the lemmings in control of the programmer?
There probably aren't any apps that you would consider using. There are going to be plenty of apps that management gives you no choice but to use.
Java webapps are the universe's way of sending people back to the 286 era of speed and functionality while allowing them to keep 32-bit color and sound.
----- His actual testing environment was a virtual machine setup programmed to emulate a "a plain-vanilla SoundBlaster card" ----- You read this where?
Even "plain vanilla SB cards" had software compatibility issues under both MS and Linux.
Talk about someone scouring for a special case to champion their point...
SB Live! is supported by OSS with the emu10k1 module. Perhaps you didn't check your permission on/dev/dsp?
Additionally, if you're compiling the kernel mod manually (as opposed to using the kmod supplied with the kernel, or even if you're compiling your own kernel) be certain to build with the recommended gcc 2.95.x.
----- If the medium is "peer reviewed scientific journal", then yes, all readers are seeking accuracy ----- *cough* *cough* *cough* Hoodwinked.
Peer reviewed scientific journals are a finer breed of shameless self-promotion. The club is tighter and gives the rest of society the impression of objective legitimacy. In reality the game is just more strenuous at forming associations with peers who can get the right paperwork across the right desk.
----- (1) Is anybody gullible enough to take that site at face value? ----- No one takes gossip at face value but it sure is fun to spread. It also makes a convenient reference point for office politics. Those who choose not to participate in gossip, or who have opinions which are not compatible with the gossip culture, are clearly not team players. They will be isolated, subtley harassed, and driven out.
----- while the war in Iraq is given only token mention ----- No one wants to hear about the billions of tax dollars that are being wasted to kill a handful of Muslims, sack their nation, and tell them how to live their lives. Especially when there's not a darned thing that can be done about it. The decisions are made out of our control.
Ratings are what count. Gossip and appeal produce good ratings. Entertainment produces ratings. Academic facts and truth seem to produce bad ratings.
----- I've never heard anybody say that they prefer news source X because it agrees with them even though it's not as accurate as the traditional media ----- Of course they don't admit it. They lose the argument if they admit to bias.
----- Rather, people prefer news sources that agree with them because they think that makes them more accurate than traditional sources ----- Okay, we agree, but with a slightly different way of looking at it. You're giving people the benefit of the doubt and saying that they innocently seek confirmation of their legitimacy. I assume that people know their views are subjective and are just being knobs because they find it amusing to watch their opposition get all wound up and flustered.
What person obsessed with power and control in a position of authority doesn't get a kick out of pointing others in six different directions at once? It's cheap entertainment to argue with someone who actually cares.
----- Thoreau's isolationism made perfect sense during his lifetime. It doesn't now. For example, you don't want to know why gas prices are suddenly so high? You just notice they are higher ----- Isolation is even more applicable in today's world. What's the point of winding yourself up knowing that the big companies are raking you dry if you can't do anything about it? Voting? Puh-leez. That system's just as rigged as the fuel pumps.
----- Publishers have a moral responsibility to the public ----- There is no such thing as moral responsibility. You've already clicked the EULA. If you believe in moral responsibility then you've been suckered.
----- If your lying to the general public in an attempt to coerce their views to something other than what they would be if you told the truth, then you've crossed the line ----- There is no line. There's money to be made.
Entertainment has always had higher sales, more appeal, and bigger profits than academics. People don't want to hear the truth. People want to be entertained.
This shouldn't be a surprise. 15 seconds of thought will reveal that the entertainment industry has always been more appealing and profitable than the academic industry.
I agree with you but you and I both know that any company big enough to negotiate outsourcing contracts is heavily involved in systems which involve our tax dollars.
Pyramid schemes, pyramid schemes. All I see are pyramid schemes.
----- a shining example of capitalism working exactly as it should? ----- Please do our world a favor and define capitalism in such a way that outsourcing wouldn't occur under any other system? Capitalism is nothing more than a barter and trade system with a standardized form of capital.
If you want to talk about economic systems please use a description which correctly fits what we have in the US. We have an economic system which is regulated heavily and controlled by government mandates and laws. An economic system which is controlled by the government is: communism.
If the government uses its power to regulate social behavior (stepping outside the bounds of economic regulation) it's: socialism.
If the government lies about it, telling you that it's all for your own good, it's: fascism.
On topic: I'm not bent out of shape about outsourcing but I fear that the reason behind the inflated US prices--the people at the top hording the cash--isn't going to be resolved by this. The greedy will always be greedy and they don't really care if the rest of us lose our jobs.
I was thinking along the same lines. What if the same bookstore posted the notice that notifies you that they'll watch you while you're in the mall and neglects to tell you that they also watch you once you're outside the mall?
Does the Amazon (and others) toolbar track only your searches and requests through their site or does it harvest your entire browser history and cookie cache?
In America your employer has the right to monitor each and every transmission that's made to and from each and every PC on their network. Additionally they have the right to scan each and every hard drive on each and every PC on their network; They also have the right to take any action, disciplinary, remedial, or otherwise, based upon information that they gather from this monitoring and scanning. The driving force of logic behind this is "because they bought the hardware and they pay for the network."
Why can't we, as home users, enforce this same Gestapo level remedial and disciplinary action based upon results of our monitoring and scanning at home? It's _our_ hardware and _our_ network and _they're_ using it in a fashion which we haven't approved and we don't deem suitable.
Every troll out there will say,"You can. You are free to install firewalls and packet logs." To this I answer,"Where's the enforcement?" Why am I not allowed to put these cookie serving sites on a 30-day performance improvement plan until they quit loading _my_ hardware and _my_ network with their junk? Why can't I take disciplinary action against the company which puts the "15% off printer cartridges" splash screen ad on my desktop? I watch real-time packet monitors every evening and see scans for port forwarders, bouncers, and "remote administration tools" on a continuous basis. The implications are horrifying. If my network would have even one of these remote adminstration tools or virii on it then any information, professional, legal, financial, or otherwise, would be instantly available to an entire world of script kiddies.
It's like standing in line, anywhere, and being hassled every five minutes by a different patron reaching into your pocket. "Sorry, just checking to see if you were watching your wallet", is all they say as they walk away every time you catch a hand digging towards your jewels. Why do I have no right opportunity to sue the EVER LOVING BEEJEEZUS out of these would-be thieves, pranksters, and hijackers?
The answer my friends is exactly as the trolls say,"You can". But unless you have ridiculous sums of money to feed to attorneys the courts will tell you to bugger off because you're not a big enough fish to have your rights protected in the same way that we give the Nazi power to employers.
Your rights online? This is America's double standard. You only have the rights which you can afford with the almighty dollar.
----- The only people who decide what you are eligeble for are at the unemplyment office ----- I'm sorry, you've been misinformed.
When you file a claim with the unemployment office they call the previous employer and ask "Is this a valid claim?" If the previous employer is not playing fair they'll say,"No". At this point your unemployment benefits have been denied. You have recourse. You are allowed to resubmit your claim. The unemployment office will again call the former employer and the former employer will again say "No". At this point you can no longer file another claim with the unemployment office.
You have recourse. If you're a woman, a minority, or a person with a legally defined disability then you have a good case to get unemployment and the attorney will probably not require an up front investigation fee. If you're a single white heterosexual male with all of your teeth and brain cells the attorney will probably ask for a $10k retainer fee in advance. Unless you're a real good friend of the attorney they'll most likely take your money and run. There is almost no legal protection. Employment is always at will when you consider that an employer can always make up an excuse and, unless you have another $20k to pay the attorney to chase down subpoenas, you'll never be able to prove them wrong.
----- to listen to advice which empowers them ----- There are two ways to be empowered: 1) To have lots of money to begin with and not be bothered if your boss is skilled at psychological manipulation and harassment, or 2) To flat out not care if you have to lose everything you own and walk down the road. If you don't qualify in 1) or 2) then a properly skilled manager can always find a string to hold.
----- That you might need a reference? ----- Unless you work for a real friendly company or happen to be your boss' lover then the company's policy on references is probably,"Yes. He worked here. I'm sorry. Company policy dictates that I can't tell you any more."
Slashdot Mirror
I've been thinking the same thing. Even on my home networks I have a standard iptables line on the OUTPUT chain which drops anything that doesn't have a valid -s just in case someone figures out a way to use my system to bounce their requests.
I only log stray network packets but this vuln is targeted at known good connections and wouldn't show up in my logs. I have a Dlink wireless NIC.
What program is generating your logs? Could you encourage it to give you more info about why the cards were resetting?
If it's an implementation issue then why haven't they already implemented it?
I was wondering why my network card has been spontaneously restarting over the last two weeks.
It would probably be "insightful" if I had left the word "Java" out.
Allow me to restate:
"Webapps, no matter what language they use, are the universe's way of sending everyone back to the 286 era of functionality and speed while allowing them to keep 32-bit color and sound."
Oh. And with prettier widgets and buttons and nifty-knobs and turney-dials and flashy-thingies.
Even with ketchup lemmings don't make a real good meal. When we had the nuke button it was so much easier to control them when they got out of hand.
You need to beat your users harder. Make them learn ftp. Tell them that if you wrote a click and drag application installer you'd be depriving them of the golden opportunity to learn.
How did the world put the lemmings in control of the programmer?
There probably aren't any apps that you would consider using. There are going to be plenty of apps that management gives you no choice but to use.
Java webapps are the universe's way of sending people back to the 286 era of speed and functionality while allowing them to keep 32-bit color and sound.
-----
His actual testing environment was a virtual machine setup programmed to emulate a "a plain-vanilla SoundBlaster card"
-----
You read this where?
Even "plain vanilla SB cards" had software compatibility issues under both MS and Linux.
Talk about someone scouring for a special case to champion their point...
SB Live! is supported by OSS with the emu10k1 module. Perhaps you didn't check your permission on /dev/dsp?
Additionally, if you're compiling the kernel mod manually (as opposed to using the kmod supplied with the kernel, or even if you're compiling your own kernel) be certain to build with the recommended gcc 2.95.x.
This article is blatant MS-funded anti-Linux vaporware. Does the author ever state which soundcard they purportedly tried using?
So what was the soundcard in the article? To me it seems the article is vaporware. I couldn't find a reference to the actual sound card at all.
-----
If the medium is "peer reviewed scientific journal", then yes, all readers are seeking accuracy
-----
*cough* *cough* *cough* Hoodwinked.
Peer reviewed scientific journals are a finer breed of shameless self-promotion. The club is tighter and gives the rest of society the impression of objective legitimacy. In reality the game is just more strenuous at forming associations with peers who can get the right paperwork across the right desk.
Similar to the patent office...
-----
(1) Is anybody gullible enough to take that site at face value?
-----
No one takes gossip at face value but it sure is fun to spread. It also makes a convenient reference point for office politics. Those who choose not to participate in gossip, or who have opinions which are not compatible with the gossip culture, are clearly not team players. They will be isolated, subtley harassed, and driven out.
-----
while the war in Iraq is given only token mention
-----
No one wants to hear about the billions of tax dollars that are being wasted to kill a handful of Muslims, sack their nation, and tell them how to live their lives. Especially when there's not a darned thing that can be done about it. The decisions are made out of our control.
Ratings are what count. Gossip and appeal produce good ratings. Entertainment produces ratings. Academic facts and truth seem to produce bad ratings.
-----
I've never heard anybody say that they prefer news source X because it agrees with them even though it's not as accurate as the traditional media
-----
Of course they don't admit it. They lose the argument if they admit to bias.
-----
Rather, people prefer news sources that agree with them because they think that makes them more accurate than traditional sources
-----
Okay, we agree, but with a slightly different way of looking at it. You're giving people the benefit of the doubt and saying that they innocently seek confirmation of their legitimacy. I assume that people know their views are subjective and are just being knobs because they find it amusing to watch their opposition get all wound up and flustered.
What person obsessed with power and control in a position of authority doesn't get a kick out of pointing others in six different directions at once? It's cheap entertainment to argue with someone who actually cares.
-----
Thoreau's isolationism made perfect sense during his lifetime. It doesn't now. For example, you don't want to know why gas prices are suddenly so high? You just notice they are higher
-----
Isolation is even more applicable in today's world. What's the point of winding yourself up knowing that the big companies are raking you dry if you can't do anything about it? Voting? Puh-leez. That system's just as rigged as the fuel pumps.
-----
Publishers have a moral responsibility to the public
-----
There is no such thing as moral responsibility. You've already clicked the EULA. If you believe in moral responsibility then you've been suckered.
-----
If your lying to the general public in an attempt to coerce their views to something other than what they would be if you told the truth, then you've crossed the line
-----
There is no line. There's money to be made.
Entertainment has always had higher sales, more appeal, and bigger profits than academics. People don't want to hear the truth. People want to be entertained.
Exactly.
This shouldn't be a surprise. 15 seconds of thought will reveal that the entertainment industry has always been more appealing and profitable than the academic industry.
I agree with you but you and I both know that any company big enough to negotiate outsourcing contracts is heavily involved in systems which involve our tax dollars.
Pyramid schemes, pyramid schemes. All I see are pyramid schemes.
-----
a shining example of capitalism working exactly as it should?
-----
Please do our world a favor and define capitalism in such a way that outsourcing wouldn't occur under any other system? Capitalism is nothing more than a barter and trade system with a standardized form of capital.
If you want to talk about economic systems please use a description which correctly fits what we have in the US. We have an economic system which is regulated heavily and controlled by government mandates and laws. An economic system which is controlled by the government is: communism.
If the government uses its power to regulate social behavior (stepping outside the bounds of economic regulation) it's: socialism.
If the government lies about it, telling you that it's all for your own good, it's: fascism.
On topic: I'm not bent out of shape about outsourcing but I fear that the reason behind the inflated US prices--the people at the top hording the cash--isn't going to be resolved by this. The greedy will always be greedy and they don't really care if the rest of us lose our jobs.
I was thinking along the same lines. What if the same bookstore posted the notice that notifies you that they'll watch you while you're in the mall and neglects to tell you that they also watch you once you're outside the mall?
Does the Amazon (and others) toolbar track only your searches and requests through their site or does it harvest your entire browser history and cookie cache?
Does this service track just your searches through them or does it harvest the entire history of your browser?
There's nothing better than the neighbor that gets permission to borrow your screwdriver and eventually walks off with your wife.
In America your employer has the right to monitor each and every transmission that's made to and from each and every PC on their network. Additionally they have the right to scan each and every hard drive on each and every PC on their network; They also have the right to take any action, disciplinary, remedial, or otherwise, based upon information that they gather from this monitoring and scanning. The driving force of logic behind this is "because they bought the hardware and they pay for the network."
Why can't we, as home users, enforce this same Gestapo level remedial and disciplinary action based upon results of our monitoring and scanning at home? It's _our_ hardware and _our_ network and _they're_ using it in a fashion which we haven't approved and we don't deem suitable.
Every troll out there will say,"You can. You are free to install firewalls and packet logs." To this I answer,"Where's the enforcement?" Why am I not allowed to put these cookie serving sites on a 30-day performance improvement plan until they quit loading _my_ hardware and _my_ network with their junk? Why can't I take disciplinary action against the company which puts the "15% off printer cartridges" splash screen ad on my desktop? I watch real-time packet monitors every evening and see scans for port forwarders, bouncers, and "remote administration tools" on a continuous basis. The implications are horrifying. If my network would have even one of these remote adminstration tools or virii on it then any information, professional, legal, financial, or otherwise, would be instantly available to an entire world of script kiddies.
It's like standing in line, anywhere, and being hassled every five minutes by a different patron reaching into your pocket. "Sorry, just checking to see if you were watching your wallet", is all they say as they walk away every time you catch a hand digging towards your jewels. Why do I have no right opportunity to sue the EVER LOVING BEEJEEZUS out of these would-be thieves, pranksters, and hijackers?
The answer my friends is exactly as the trolls say,"You can". But unless you have ridiculous sums of money to feed to attorneys the courts will tell you to bugger off because you're not a big enough fish to have your rights protected in the same way that we give the Nazi power to employers.
Your rights online? This is America's double standard. You only have the rights which you can afford with the almighty dollar.
-----
The only people who decide what you are eligeble for are at the unemplyment office
-----
I'm sorry, you've been misinformed.
When you file a claim with the unemployment office they call the previous employer and ask "Is this a valid claim?" If the previous employer is not playing fair they'll say,"No". At this point your unemployment benefits have been denied. You have recourse. You are allowed to resubmit your claim. The unemployment office will again call the former employer and the former employer will again say "No". At this point you can no longer file another claim with the unemployment office.
You have recourse. If you're a woman, a minority, or a person with a legally defined disability then you have a good case to get unemployment and the attorney will probably not require an up front investigation fee. If you're a single white heterosexual male with all of your teeth and brain cells the attorney will probably ask for a $10k retainer fee in advance. Unless you're a real good friend of the attorney they'll most likely take your money and run. There is almost no legal protection. Employment is always at will when you consider that an employer can always make up an excuse and, unless you have another $20k to pay the attorney to chase down subpoenas, you'll never be able to prove them wrong.
-----
to listen to advice which empowers them
-----
There are two ways to be empowered: 1) To have lots of money to begin with and not be bothered if your boss is skilled at psychological manipulation and harassment, or 2) To flat out not care if you have to lose everything you own and walk down the road. If you don't qualify in 1) or 2) then a properly skilled manager can always find a string to hold.
-----
That you might need a reference?
-----
Unless you work for a real friendly company or happen to be your boss' lover then the company's policy on references is probably,"Yes. He worked here. I'm sorry. Company policy dictates that I can't tell you any more."
Burn the bridges.