I worked for a small company under a boss who during my second week informed me that he wanted me to, "take over the technical side of business." So he could, "Sit back here and get fat."
I thought, great! in two years I'll have someone under me, running the software development, this could go far.
4 years later, I was in-deed handling everything technical, including project managment of significant software development projects, technical support, website development and system administration. In short, I was the IT department. Not that it should be unexpected at a small company, as my boss said, "we all have to wear a lot of hats." Funny that most of his said "DUNCE" on them. But the extent that it was taken to, my workload, stress, and the lack of any growth opportunities, it was a bad scene
In the end, I got fed up. We hired another developer, and it looked like I might finally get a chance to move up. Nope, he was essentially going to be taking over the one part of my job that I found interesting, software development. My boss stated that he was, "Queit, like that genius quiet." I would call him, "Quiet, like that really creepy quiet." Alarms went off when he came into my office his third day there and asked me some development questions that anyone worth their salt would know. Such as, "VB just crashed, what should I do?" And another gem, "How do I get a WinSock control to connect?"
Four short months later I basically had enough. I was managing the largest project the company had ever tried to undertake in an organized fashion, and my boss essentially took credit for all my work, and reemed myself and the other developer out every weekly meeting. So I told him off in dramatic fashion - pointing out his short comings and lack of any real involvment in the current project.
I was fired a week later...
In retrospect it was decent money for someone in their mid 20s (~33k), but for the amount of stress I was under (2 nervous breakdowns in the office), it just wasn't worth it. I was told the only reason I was fired was because I didn't apologize. I'm still glad I didn't.
Bottom line is when working for an technically incompetant boss, find an out. Network like crazy and find someone who you can work with, not work for. Me, well, I bailed without a parachute. But now I'm back in school, completing my MIS degree, and I hope to take my old bosses job from him at some point. That would be such sweet revenge.
I work at a retail chain, we'll call it "Really Good Buy". Note that I was a software developer and systems administrator prior to my ahem... dismissal.
Anyway, I have had several customers coming in over the last fer weeks looking for Firefox, asking questions about it, or just mentioning it.
Granted that the affect of the new release probably won't be apparent for the next several months, but to hear "Really Good Buy" customers asking about it... to me that is something.
Over the last 10 - 15 years of my life I have been inundated with enough statistics to choke a goat. Part of the problem is that I am somewhat immune, and I think a lot of people are still over-reacting to statistics.
Fact: Over 17,400 people are killed each year in alcohol related car accidents. That's one death nearly every 1/2 hour in this country at the hands of a drinking driver.
Fact: Approximately 275,000 persons are injured or disfigured yearly by alcohol-impaired drivers. One third of these are children.
Boo-fsking-hoo!
Unfortunately the stats A) don't lie, and B) don't tell you what area they are looking at. Is it in a state? The country? North America? My point is that most of these legislative attempts are based on one crying mother and whole crew of people waving sheets of paper with stats just like that above. When you really look at it, it isn't that bad. Particularly in more populace areas. This country has bigger problems than drunk-driving. Like raising your damn kids so that they aren't drunks.
1) The computing solution
How exactly is this change over going to take place over the next two years? As soon as a few major corporations implement it they won't be able to receive email from those who haven't. That not too mention the fact that the communcation of said calculation is another drain on the net while we wait (supposedly hopefully) for people to adopt the new calc procedure. If it is made backward compatible then whats the point in doing it at all? The only way to filter out those emails is to lump them into a seperate folder - while "we" are "adopting" that folder is rapidly going to be viewed as a spam filter. Unfortunately it is going to get filled with good emails. I don't know about you, but my baysian filter works pretty damn well right now.
2) Paying for email?
This one has so many holes it is laughable. First, who collects postage, ICANN, W3C, Microsoft? And who collects the fee for international mail? And how is it dispersed? And who is going to keep the price reasonable? I myself send upwards of 20 emails a day. That is going to get damn expensive even at $.10 an email.
And if the "postage" is implemented, what about email lists? Sending to 100,000's of/.ers would be prohibitively expensive.
I could go on, but I am sure everyone else can see how assinine the solutions are.
I realize this is offtopic, but something just struck me...
Lets look at the possible outcomes of the lawsuit
A) SCO wins, Linux does in fact contain code that was copyrighted.
- So now the Linux community is in shock. However if SCO wants to release ANY Linux software they will have to GPL the code or remove it - thus revelaing it to the rest of the community allowing them to remove the offending code and making the lawsuit a moot point.
B) SCO loses, the code doesn't exist, or was previously GPL'd by SCO.
- SCO loses its entire customer base (never trust a traitor, not even one you create). And closes its doors or is sold on the cheap.
C) Someone bails SCO out, buys everything before the lawsuit ends.
- SCO doesn't sell cheaply, Daryl gets out with millions in "severance pay", Linux community moves on.
Was just thinking, wouldn't "safety" in the mind of a software engineer being "failing safely"? i.e. not bringing down the entire system due to one application? I don't mind the single application so much as I mind memory leaks and security holes that tend to decimate the rest of my applications.
I would think that an at least somewhat "cookie cutter" approach could be taken with these issues. Granted I wouldn't recommend them for an open source project. My thought is that if you intend to make money off it: it cannot interfere with another project (barring that it is designed to do so i.e. Spybot S&D), it cannot crash the entire system, it must be secure.
Of course in this day and age people accept that things aren't going to be secure, not without insane overhead. Well that is what the certification process is about. UL charges $$$ to have things UL certified. They charge even more to come on-site to tell you that you can't call it UL certified until there are 3 additional stickers in place (been there).
So create the UL of software for commercial applications. If you want to run it on a PC and make money from it you have to have it XX certified. It costs $3000 to have the software certified, and takes x months. It would slow the release of commercial software but at least stability would be improved. And many crashes are due to third party software, even the interaction between other applications.
-Coach
Ok, so M$'s FUD machine is gearing up. What option do we have other than bitch on the/. forums? I know donate to the EFF, write open code, blah blah - bullshit.
I want to know what I CAN DO. From writing a senator, to going postal at M$. What are our options as Open Source advocates to beat the M$ FUD machine? An OpenFUD project? Because despite flame wars on/., despite arguements in IRC, despite all our efforts sooner or later the M$ FUD will find something that sticks in the back of the minds of all our PHBs. At which point OS security will be M$'s triumph instead of ours.
...really want one of those micro racers to do this with? Or a micro tank that shoots pellets? (That gun has to be triggered by somethine, might as well be a joystick trigger)... Terrorize the office or the classroom with your laptop!
-Coach
Has anyone considered the fact that if you can play it on a PC there is almost no way to keep it secure. It is the infamous "analog hole" - ust hook a PC's audio in port to an audio out on another PC. Play the song through your sound card and capture the sound on the other PC - heck it could even be accomplished with one PC. You might lose some clarity, but this is Snoop D-O Double-G MP3s we're talking about, not a Symphony at Carnegie hall...
THe headline is a twist. The headline implies a female/mail ratio, the actuality is 59% of gamers are male. Not that I am saying that it is a good thing that I sit here slaughtering demons instead of... say... having a life...
The announcement and subsequent article imply that 1/2 of all crashes are not Microsoft's fault. Assuming that Office, Money and other MS apps are written "better" than 3rd party code - we can assume that they cause say, 30% of the MS responsible crashes.
Based on those assumptions 35% of *all* crashes are based on operating system specific code. Based on Dvorak's estimation of crashes/day means 24.5 million crashes per day are due to code withing the operating system. That is not a very good number, esp. considering that this is code that other developers have no access to, and can't work around.
It is the basis of the closed-source model that anything that I can't see works, the black box theory. You tell it to do something, the black box whirs, beeps and spits out a number. If you start to assume that the box will crash then the theory no longer works. The solution, accept the fact that it will crash and make your application tolerant to crashes - save early, save often.
The rewrite of the headline from "Microsoft criticises third party code for Windows crashes" to "Microsoft Code at Fault for Half of all Windows Crashes" seemed a bit unfair, and typical/. when I first red it. However, after reading the article and running the numbers (with my assumptions) the rewrite not only seems acceptable, but even neccesary to uncover the underlying truth behind the numbers.
But then we are back to where we started. The original problem of voter fraud. Who cares if everyone can count the votes. Cryptographical methods despite their best intents will be based on code, human code. That code will have bugs and the crypt will be broken.
Slashdot Mirror
They tried this on the original Napster. Blocking "Madonna", "Metallica", "Godsmack - Voodoo" etc...
Didn't last long, people started sharing as "Madona", "Metalica" and "Goodsmack - Snake bite".
Please, banned words from a list?!? How 1990s...
-Coach
So if the anti-trust suit had never happend this would have been perfectly acceptable to "higher-level business persons"?
The quote says more than I think they intended.
-Coach
I worked for a small company under a boss who during my second week informed me that he wanted me to, "take over the technical side of business." So he could, "Sit back here and get fat."
I thought, great! in two years I'll have someone under me, running the software development, this could go far.
4 years later, I was in-deed handling everything technical, including project managment of significant software development projects, technical support, website development and system administration. In short, I was the IT department. Not that it should be unexpected at a small company, as my boss said, "we all have to wear a lot of hats." Funny that most of his said "DUNCE" on them. But the extent that it was taken to, my workload, stress, and the lack of any growth opportunities, it was a bad scene
In the end, I got fed up. We hired another developer, and it looked like I might finally get a chance to move up. Nope, he was essentially going to be taking over the one part of my job that I found interesting, software development. My boss stated that he was, "Queit, like that genius quiet." I would call him, "Quiet, like that really creepy quiet." Alarms went off when he came into my office his third day there and asked me some development questions that anyone worth their salt would know. Such as, "VB just crashed, what should I do?" And another gem, "How do I get a WinSock control to connect?"
Four short months later I basically had enough. I was managing the largest project the company had ever tried to undertake in an organized fashion, and my boss essentially took credit for all my work, and reemed myself and the other developer out every weekly meeting. So I told him off in dramatic fashion - pointing out his short comings and lack of any real involvment in the current project.
I was fired a week later...
In retrospect it was decent money for someone in their mid 20s (~33k), but for the amount of stress I was under (2 nervous breakdowns in the office), it just wasn't worth it. I was told the only reason I was fired was because I didn't apologize. I'm still glad I didn't.
Bottom line is when working for an technically incompetant boss, find an out. Network like crazy and find someone who you can work with, not work for. Me, well, I bailed without a parachute. But now I'm back in school, completing my MIS degree, and I hope to take my old bosses job from him at some point. That would be such sweet revenge.
So the commercialization of the Internet(1) wasn't a perversion/subversion of the communications medium the Internet(1) was developed for?
The team is growing ata bout 3 members a minute right now, already up to 900+
"InsBot, which is green, the size of a matchbox and equipped with lasers and a light sensor..."
/dr.evil
Cockroaches with frickin lasers on their heads...
-Coach
Actually there is quite a buzz about Firefox.
I work at a retail chain, we'll call it "Really Good Buy". Note that I was a software developer and systems administrator prior to my ahem... dismissal.
Anyway, I have had several customers coming in over the last fer weeks looking for Firefox, asking questions about it, or just mentioning it.
Granted that the affect of the new release probably won't be apparent for the next several months, but to hear "Really Good Buy" customers asking about it... to me that is something.
-Coach
One thing you should realize is that Microsoft loses money on every XBox sold.
The general strategy in consoles is games and licensing.
-iCoach
There have been a few other OSes that disabled the ability to use USB drives... Win98 (first edition), Win95, Win3.1, DOS...
Security through obscurity?
Longhorn is going to be "progressive" by disabling the latest technology?
-iCoach
1. Military/Government switches to OSS.
2. Military/Government helps develop OSS.
3. [Everybody] Profit[s]
Like my momma always said, if your not part of the solution...
-Coach
right now.. posting from...
Wisconsin.
-Coach
Boo-fsking-hoo!
Unfortunately the stats A) don't lie, and B) don't tell you what area they are looking at. Is it in a state? The country? North America? My point is that most of these legislative attempts are based on one crying mother and whole crew of people waving sheets of paper with stats just like that above. When you really look at it, it isn't that bad. Particularly in more populace areas. This country has bigger problems than drunk-driving. Like raising your damn kids so that they aren't drunks.
-Coach
... somethin else to make fscking sweawing more fscking prevelante.
Fsck spell chack and preview.
-Coach
1) The computing solution
/.ers would be prohibitively expensive.
How exactly is this change over going to take place over the next two years? As soon as a few major corporations implement it they won't be able to receive email from those who haven't. That not too mention the fact that the communcation of said calculation is another drain on the net while we wait (supposedly hopefully) for people to adopt the new calc procedure. If it is made backward compatible then whats the point in doing it at all? The only way to filter out those emails is to lump them into a seperate folder - while "we" are "adopting" that folder is rapidly going to be viewed as a spam filter. Unfortunately it is going to get filled with good emails. I don't know about you, but my baysian filter works pretty damn well right now.
2) Paying for email? This one has so many holes it is laughable. First, who collects postage, ICANN, W3C, Microsoft? And who collects the fee for international mail? And how is it dispersed? And who is going to keep the price reasonable? I myself send upwards of 20 emails a day. That is going to get damn expensive even at $.10 an email.
And if the "postage" is implemented, what about email lists? Sending to 100,000's of
I could go on, but I am sure everyone else can see how assinine the solutions are.
-Coach
I realize this is offtopic, but something just struck me... Lets look at the possible outcomes of the lawsuit
A) SCO wins, Linux does in fact contain code that was copyrighted.
- So now the Linux community is in shock. However if SCO wants to release ANY Linux software they will have to GPL the code or remove it - thus revelaing it to the rest of the community allowing them to remove the offending code and making the lawsuit a moot point.
B) SCO loses, the code doesn't exist, or was previously GPL'd by SCO.
- SCO loses its entire customer base (never trust a traitor, not even one you create). And closes its doors or is sold on the cheap.
C) Someone bails SCO out, buys everything before the lawsuit ends.
- SCO doesn't sell cheaply, Daryl gets out with millions in "severance pay", Linux community moves on.
You tell me where the lawsuit is going.
-Coach
Was just thinking, wouldn't "safety" in the mind of a software engineer being "failing safely"? i.e. not bringing down the entire system due to one application? I don't mind the single application so much as I mind memory leaks and security holes that tend to decimate the rest of my applications. I would think that an at least somewhat "cookie cutter" approach could be taken with these issues. Granted I wouldn't recommend them for an open source project. My thought is that if you intend to make money off it: it cannot interfere with another project (barring that it is designed to do so i.e. Spybot S&D), it cannot crash the entire system, it must be secure. Of course in this day and age people accept that things aren't going to be secure, not without insane overhead. Well that is what the certification process is about. UL charges $$$ to have things UL certified. They charge even more to come on-site to tell you that you can't call it UL certified until there are 3 additional stickers in place (been there). So create the UL of software for commercial applications. If you want to run it on a PC and make money from it you have to have it XX certified. It costs $3000 to have the software certified, and takes x months. It would slow the release of commercial software but at least stability would be improved. And many crashes are due to third party software, even the interaction between other applications. -Coach
I for one welcome our new German overlords.
-Coach
Ok, so M$'s FUD machine is gearing up. What option do we have other than bitch on the /. forums? I know donate to the EFF, write open code, blah blah - bullshit.
/., despite arguements in IRC, despite all our efforts sooner or later the M$ FUD will find something that sticks in the back of the minds of all our PHBs. At which point OS security will be M$'s triumph instead of ours.
I want to know what I CAN DO. From writing a senator, to going postal at M$. What are our options as Open Source advocates to beat the M$ FUD machine? An OpenFUD project? Because despite flame wars on
-Coach
Anyone else see a strange correlation between a "voucher" and the wuffie points found in Down and Out in the Magic Kingdom?
Are we moving to a more meritocratic society?
'Scuse me I have to go work with my Ad-Hoc...
-Coach
...really want one of those micro racers to do this with? Or a micro tank that shoots pellets? (That gun has to be triggered by somethine, might as well be a joystick trigger)... Terrorize the office or the classroom with your laptop! -Coach
Has anyone considered the fact that if you can play it on a PC there is almost no way to keep it secure. It is the infamous "analog hole" - ust hook a PC's audio in port to an audio out on another PC. Play the song through your sound card and capture the sound on the other PC - heck it could even be accomplished with one PC. You might lose some clarity, but this is Snoop D-O Double-G MP3s we're talking about, not a Symphony at Carnegie hall...
-Coach
THe headline is a twist. The headline implies a female/mail ratio, the actuality is 59% of gamers are male. Not that I am saying that it is a good thing that I sit here slaughtering demons instead of... say... having a life...
-Coach
The announcement and subsequent article imply that 1/2 of all crashes are not Microsoft's fault. Assuming that Office, Money and other MS apps are written "better" than 3rd party code - we can assume that they cause say, 30% of the MS responsible crashes.
/. when I first red it. However, after reading the article and running the numbers (with my assumptions) the rewrite not only seems acceptable, but even neccesary to uncover the underlying truth behind the numbers.
Based on those assumptions 35% of *all* crashes are based on operating system specific code. Based on Dvorak's estimation of crashes/day means 24.5 million crashes per day are due to code withing the operating system. That is not a very good number, esp. considering that this is code that other developers have no access to, and can't work around.
It is the basis of the closed-source model that anything that I can't see works, the black box theory. You tell it to do something, the black box whirs, beeps and spits out a number. If you start to assume that the box will crash then the theory no longer works. The solution, accept the fact that it will crash and make your application tolerant to crashes - save early, save often.
The rewrite of the headline from "Microsoft criticises third party code for Windows crashes" to "Microsoft Code at Fault for Half of all Windows Crashes" seemed a bit unfair, and typical
-Coach
But then we are back to where we started. The original problem of voter fraud. Who cares if everyone can count the votes. Cryptographical methods despite their best intents will be based on code, human code. That code will have bugs and the crypt will be broken.
-Coach
Apathy