I believe implicitly in open source. My customers have full source code for their database systems even. My implicit answer is therefore 'yes', feel free to go over it and tell me if there's a mistake that's relevant to you.
Unlike my code, these climate reports are relevant to all of us, the entire public. Scientists who want to pretend they're all independent geniuses like Sheldon* and can get away with ignoring outside correction are doing the scientific community no favours in terms of public opinion.
*Big Bang Theory reference, for anyone truly out of touch with television:)
Suricata's top speeds today may be slower than Snort's. Jonkman is citing Suricata at 8 to 10 Gbit/sec and Roesch cites Snort at 50 Gbit/sec, with both acknowledging a lot of range due to platform use. But beyond that, Roesch says Suricata is basically a "sub-set of Snort's functionality at a fraction of its performance." He even calls Suricata a "clone of Snort" as it uses Snort signatures. The OISF's description of Suricata does include how to use Snort signatures with Suricata and transition off of the Snort platform.
"They've produced a clone of Snort that performs worse at taxpayer's expense," Roesch says. "They haven't advanced IDS."
So, the taxpayer paid good money to develop a slower and less functional version of an already open-source product. Brilliant.
SELinux was a good investment of taxpayer dollars. This was not, as far as I can tell.
Most of my games cost between $15 and $25 from the 'slightly used' rack at Blockbuster after they've been rented out a few times. New games I often purchase once they've hit their half-million sales and get auto-discounted to $40 by Sony as a Greatest Hit. For a few games, I purchase at full price, exactly $59.92 at Walmart because I really like the publisher and know I want to play it online during the initial and busiest phase of the online component.
Facebook is a much better way for most people to communicate than a personal E-mail because they don't have to wade through 500 spam to get the message, negotiate with six different programs to upload and rotate and label their photos then worry about who can see them or not.
Its all integrated, and it works very well for a lot of people. If you don't like using it, or you know how to use something else better, that's great, so long as every other contact you have feels the same way.
Personally, your comment about making sure to stay in touch is redundant. You're implying that Facebook is less staying in touch than say writing a letter. If it is, its only because you chose not to write the same amount to them. The platform isn't hampering you.
They do make some pretty ignorant observations about things they're not experts in, but to be honest, the average person who needs consumer reports to choose a mountain bike may not realize that fact:)
Some of us are adults with mortgages and car payments and throwing away $1000 on a new video card seems pretty stupid too. I gave up the rat race, bought a PS3 and realized 90% of my gaming needs have been satisfied for years now without a hardware upgrade.
I'm pretty sure you two just have an English terminology barrier. You believe "using the phone" means "making a call with the phone" whereas the OP and I both think "using the phone" means anything involving the phone's hardware, which would include those apps, games, etc. that use iAd.
When using your iCalculator, you're using your phone.
Reading the man pages for (random example) memcpy tells you how to define it. It also describes what it does. Tell me how you'd re-implement this function without your header definition being identical to SCO's (and yes, the definition is included verbatim right there):
DESCRIPTION
The memcpy() function copies n bytes from memory area src to memory area
dest. The memory areas should not overlap. Use memmove(3) if the memory
areas do overlap.
Sorry to karma-whore here, but I have to requote this with my +1 and hope people mod you up:
The fundamental question that should be asked of climate scientists is, "Do your models support the current temperature record, to include the current flat trend?" and "If not, why not?". I've searched quite a bit to see if any model actually predicted the last decade's temperatures, and thus far have not found anything. At a minimum, that points to a hole in the theory and makes me question the iron-clad conclusions that are based on models that, at best, have a few major flaws.
And all of the above is fine. Let them data mine for inconsistencies, and then debate whether those error checks and errors should rightly be ignored or filtered, and whether the proper math was used for handling trends.
A programmer who says to me "my algorithm is right and nobody else should touch it" isn't something that makes me sleep better at night, and it shouldn't work for any other discipline either.
I think you completely missed the point of what was said there -- big media who would normally bother digging for information to actually inform the public of the facts without necessarily taking sides is just repeating the press releases from the scientific community as though there's no debate involved. Even if you don't believe there should be a debate, there is one, and even if you disagree with all those debating the issue, its not for the media to pick sides.
Without throwing any support on any of the individuals involved as I've never sat down for a coffee with any of them personally, I have to say this reminds me of the 'why math is useful for programmers' story. A lot of people who really are experts in their own fields aren't experts in obscure or simply difficult math, and get it wrong. Getting the math wrong in almost any field is going to lead to errors, and its not so embarrassing if you let a mathematician look at the data before you publish, or at least before you go defending your skills.
It seems to me that having a statistician with the proper bounds information as a proof-reader of sorts would be an excellent idea.
I keep a low-credit limit card from a large bank just for this purpose. I make various online purchases with it and use it for proof of solvency for reserving a room at a hotel or such, but never make a purchase over about $50 with it. Its very very easy to spot any fraud on the bill at the end of the month, and very easy to call and explain and have the charges removed. As a Canadian I can heartily recommend both Canadian Tire Credit and the Bank of Montreal Mastercards for being very quick and easy going about removing potentially fraudulent charges.
In the case of CT Credit, they've even called me, checking to see if a purchase made with my card was fraudulent because it deviated from my usual purchase habits. It turns out it was not. I might add, they were also very professional about card security; something to the effect of "This is at Canadian Tire Credit. We'd like to discuss a security issue with your credit card. Could you please call me back at the toll-free number on the back of your credit card, and enter my extension, 5555 to continue the call."
After proving to me that I was in fact speaking with the company in question, they verified my identity and we completed the discussion quickly, but I must say I was impressed with the basic professionalism.
I travel a lot, and frequently grit my teeth when I call a hotel I've stayed at before and confirm only my name before they ask if I'd like to use the same card I used before, then reserve the room for me on the stored card info.
Slashdot Mirror
I believe implicitly in open source. My customers have full source code for their database systems even. My implicit answer is therefore 'yes', feel free to go over it and tell me if there's a mistake that's relevant to you.
Unlike my code, these climate reports are relevant to all of us, the entire public. Scientists who want to pretend they're all independent geniuses like Sheldon* and can get away with ignoring outside correction are doing the scientific community no favours in terms of public opinion.
*Big Bang Theory reference, for anyone truly out of touch with television :)
For people who don't read the article:
So, the taxpayer paid good money to develop a slower and less functional version of an already open-source product. Brilliant.
SELinux was a good investment of taxpayer dollars. This was not, as far as I can tell.
No, actually, they wouldn't.
But I can introduce you to a lot of others who also seem to think so.
Human corruption aside, you do realize what a huge carbon sink both the ocean and forests are right?
Our carbon output may be high, but so-called natural* carbon output is even higher.
*why is it natural when its anything but human, as though somehow we weren't on the same playing field as the rest of nature?
Most of my games cost between $15 and $25 from the 'slightly used' rack at Blockbuster after they've been rented out a few times. New games I often purchase once they've hit their half-million sales and get auto-discounted to $40 by Sony as a Greatest Hit. For a few games, I purchase at full price, exactly $59.92 at Walmart because I really like the publisher and know I want to play it online during the initial and busiest phase of the online component.
That's wit, not whit, and no, it informs the morons who didn't get it.
Nothing spoils the wit about an explanation you didn't need.
Facebook is a much better way for most people to communicate than a personal E-mail because they don't have to wade through 500 spam to get the message, negotiate with six different programs to upload and rotate and label their photos then worry about who can see them or not.
Its all integrated, and it works very well for a lot of people. If you don't like using it, or you know how to use something else better, that's great, so long as every other contact you have feels the same way.
Personally, your comment about making sure to stay in touch is redundant. You're implying that Facebook is less staying in touch than say writing a letter. If it is, its only because you chose not to write the same amount to them. The platform isn't hampering you.
If they want their image untarnished, they should fix the antenna problem and quit denying there is one.
Your house doesn't keep the rain out, it needs a tarp for that ... is it broken? Hell yeah.
"I don't care."
Obligatory Youtube link
They do make some pretty ignorant observations about things they're not experts in, but to be honest, the average person who needs consumer reports to choose a mountain bike may not realize that fact :)
They could get themselves a whole new class of subscribers :)
Its funny, I played Quake, Quake 2, Quake 3, Neverwinter Nights, and many more games on OpenGL and Linux long before this.
Some of us are adults with mortgages and car payments and throwing away $1000 on a new video card seems pretty stupid too. I gave up the rat race, bought a PS3 and realized 90% of my gaming needs have been satisfied for years now without a hardware upgrade.
I'm pretty sure you two just have an English terminology barrier. You believe "using the phone" means "making a call with the phone" whereas the OP and I both think "using the phone" means anything involving the phone's hardware, which would include those apps, games, etc. that use iAd.
When using your iCalculator, you're using your phone.
You're not a programmer, are you?
Reading the man pages for (random example) memcpy tells you how to define it. It also describes what it does. Tell me how you'd re-implement this function without your header definition being identical to SCO's (and yes, the definition is included verbatim right there):
NAME
memcpy - copy memory area
SYNOPSIS
#include <string.h>
void *memcpy(void *dest, const void *src, size_t n);
DESCRIPTION
The memcpy() function copies n bytes from memory area src to memory area
dest. The memory areas should not overlap. Use memmove(3) if the memory
areas do overlap.
Actually a number of cases have shown this is precisely the case if you're either on work time or dealing with work issues.
Even private text messages on public servants' blackberries are public record according to a recent ruling.
In an older case, I recall browser history being requested by the media to prove that public servants weren't working very hard for their money.
Sorry to karma-whore here, but I have to requote this with my +1 and hope people mod you up:
And all of the above is fine. Let them data mine for inconsistencies, and then debate whether those error checks and errors should rightly be ignored or filtered, and whether the proper math was used for handling trends.
A programmer who says to me "my algorithm is right and nobody else should touch it" isn't something that makes me sleep better at night, and it shouldn't work for any other discipline either.
I think you completely missed the point of what was said there -- big media who would normally bother digging for information to actually inform the public of the facts without necessarily taking sides is just repeating the press releases from the scientific community as though there's no debate involved. Even if you don't believe there should be a debate, there is one, and even if you disagree with all those debating the issue, its not for the media to pick sides.
Without throwing any support on any of the individuals involved as I've never sat down for a coffee with any of them personally, I have to say this reminds me of the 'why math is useful for programmers' story. A lot of people who really are experts in their own fields aren't experts in obscure or simply difficult math, and get it wrong. Getting the math wrong in almost any field is going to lead to errors, and its not so embarrassing if you let a mathematician look at the data before you publish, or at least before you go defending your skills.
It seems to me that having a statistician with the proper bounds information as a proof-reader of sorts would be an excellent idea.
And is precisely why a number of people no longer trust the scientific community's findings in general, especially on controversial subjects.
Its the Cathedral and the Bazaar all over again.
"Trust me, because I said so and you're an idiot" vs "Sure, here's the data, and why it supports my hypothesis"
While a horrible practice, this is why the security code is printed on the back of the card and not included in normal credit card number print-outs.
The security code should be required for any payment, but is never displayed for security reasons.
I keep a low-credit limit card from a large bank just for this purpose. I make various online purchases with it and use it for proof of solvency for reserving a room at a hotel or such, but never make a purchase over about $50 with it. Its very very easy to spot any fraud on the bill at the end of the month, and very easy to call and explain and have the charges removed. As a Canadian I can heartily recommend both Canadian Tire Credit and the Bank of Montreal Mastercards for being very quick and easy going about removing potentially fraudulent charges.
In the case of CT Credit, they've even called me, checking to see if a purchase made with my card was fraudulent because it deviated from my usual purchase habits. It turns out it was not. I might add, they were also very professional about card security; something to the effect of "This is at Canadian Tire Credit. We'd like to discuss a security issue with your credit card. Could you please call me back at the toll-free number on the back of your credit card, and enter my extension, 5555 to continue the call."
After proving to me that I was in fact speaking with the company in question, they verified my identity and we completed the discussion quickly, but I must say I was impressed with the basic professionalism.
I travel a lot, and frequently grit my teeth when I call a hotel I've stayed at before and confirm only my name before they ask if I'd like to use the same card I used before, then reserve the room for me on the stored card info.