It'd be more effective if we just put everyone in jail with forced labour and didn't give them any money to begin with.
I believe money laundering laws are at least one step beyond what most people regard a free society. If the police can't deal with crime in an ethical way, why did we need them again?
Why should it matter unless you're a loser who can't improve? "That's pretty good" is a lie, and people who talk to you like that are not your friends. I'd get a new instructor if they talked down to me like that.
Microsoft was NOT the first to have tablets, I don't know who was, but clearly Apple made the Newton in 1993, which to this day outshines all tablets (including ipads) in several areas. It was even able to recognise ordinary handwriting with no training at all, which at the time was an incredible feat.
Not that tablets are of any consequence, since they seem to have evolved into a pissing contest of who can sell the shittiest hardware, with least available software, for the most outrageous prices.
Just because Tim tries to retroactively include everything and the kitchen sink in his definition, in the effort to promote his agenda, doesn't mean he isn't wrong. Most people in the know would define the web strictly as the w3 standardised stuff that normally runs on ports 80 and 443. Just because you can ftp:// in a url doesn't make it part of the web, it can't even link back. Even if it did, you'd have a much stronger argument in arguing that PDF and MS-word documents, or Flash are part of the web too, which they clearly aren't.
ISPs have many times tried to cheat customers into accepting web-connections rather than internet-connections. AOL, compuserv etc?
The internet was designed to withstand a nuclear attack, clearly the web cannot.
Therefore we have some very compelling reasons to make a strong distinction between the words.
The web is an ugly confusing mess, don't drag the beautiful internet, that made it all possible, into it.
Wonderful, you just popped out of your world and ignored everything that's been said.
Access is a clever idea for a program, but it's very limited, has a severely buggy DB engine, and a scripting language meant for 3yr olds? It's a well known fact that Access DBs lose lots of data very often and suddenly. You're lucky that there's probably some unlucky admin cleaning up the mess you cause. Oh, and the free alternatives are better in every conceivable way.
Now, If you want to be the monkey mechanic who glues the steering wheel onto the car, be my guest. We can always hire "real programmers" instead.
Linux is pretty secure, works well and is easy to administer, Microsoft on the other hand is still trying to learn the basics of writing an OS.
When you show me a SINGLE distro, just one mind you, that not using any tricks can be updated from...oh lets say the 2005 release to current with ZERO breakage then you will have a valid argument.
Do you mean to imply that this is possible to accomplish, with any currently popular OS apart from Linux distros?
But since you asked, I can give you one, Gentoo. I have boxes that automatically update fine since around a decade back, and they have always contained up to date versions of a huge amount of the currently most popular software, although they barely have enough hdd space now...
The Linux distro update fiasco you speak of; I believe it is entirely a consequence of having binary packages. Just see how many FOSS projects guarantee binary compatibility, and you will get the picture of why it's a bad idea.
Slackware teaches Unix, which is necessary for a complete understanding of the basics.
Gentoo is very complicated but offers unparallelled (and necessary) flexibility. And is the only (meta-) distro which can easily be maintained for years, and on different archs. Once people know how to use it, they are equipped with dealing with any kind of problem they might encounter on their system.
Most other distros, are surprisingly similar. * Binary package managers * Offer only one or two well maintained archs * Claim to be Easy to use (TM) * Can often be administered in limited ways without actually understanding what you are doing. * Hard to maintain over a longer period of time.
Unix security isn't just a topic of discussion and a bunch of tools, it's a set of rules and assumptions that thousands of people seem to agree upon.
* There are 2 security levels: root and user.
* A user cannot do things which could harm any other user or the system.
* Harmful behaviour is defined by root. It's a chain of trust like so: everyone else -> root -> user
(root guarantees to the rest of the network that they will not, and will not allow users to do anything bad)
* Changing system configuration is always defined as harmful behaviour
* The user who administers the system also has a root account, which is used with more care than their normal account.
* Installing hardware is per definition changing the system configuration and always requires root access.
* In a different world, it'd probably be logical to filter all except local network access by users as well, since only the admin can really be liable. But in todays internet where nobody seems to be liable for anything, we can safely ignore this restriction.
Things have changed since then, and the "system" is nowadays a portable computer where the only user is also the admin. And any case where the user isn't given a root account as well, in effect *reduces* security, since otherwise the user will just put the system-sensitive stuff in their home directory if they can. Still, there's a very good reason for at least 2 different security levels, it means the system can protect you from yourself, using your own guidance.
Now, the topic of printers; printers are hardware devices, but don't always need installing to be used.
If your printer is a network printer, and all you require is sending it postscript/pcl/pdf via a network protocol, and your user has unhindered network access. No hardware installation is necessary, and printing requires the same privileges you enjoy while sending e-mail.
If your printer is a usb/parallel device and your operating system already knows how to talk to it, in theory you could by default allow any user to access it. But it would be a very stupid default since it cannot be known which users on the system should have access to it, this is best left for root to configure correctly.
If it's a winprinter (a printer which requires a program from a manufacturer) and connects via usb/parallel, it would most definitely need root to install, since only the admin can make any kind of correct judgement in this case.
However, I don't see a reason why a network connected winprinter should need root privileges (although it's very rare to find such installers) and print systems aren't pre-configured this way, nothing is stopping *you* from doing it right now on any fairly ordinary system.
Printing hardware is nowadays unique, in that most printers adhere to standards which has made it possible to seemingly "install hardware" without configuring a system. People who think it should always "just work" aren't considering all the security aspects. What if your attacker, an industrial spy, plants a rootkit on your printer? that'd compromise all printed documents from other user accounts as well. Actually, strike that. Never trust a network, not even your own, and you're safe;)
You can draw your own conclusions or you can take mine: They were wrong not give Linus' girl a root account on her laptop, but Linus is also wrong to demand system configuration without a root account.
Many of us think that Final Fantasy 6 was the best game of all time. And that FF7, although good, was a bit of a disappointment when compared to its' three most recent predecessors:)
That's just a modern definition of snake oil. If you don't show us your ingredients, so we can know whether it works or can kill you, it should be punishable by law to sell.
Your examples are not in any way related to this situation, a Chavy, Lada and Mercedes are all very similar things, which afaik have worked the same way since 60 yrs back, so of course the same mechanic can repair any of them. Now if you said engine repair, and diesel and petrol engine. then I might agree.
Comparing Windows to Linux is like comparing a car to a helicopter. One is more capable, but it's also more complicated to use and build.
Someone who has used only C# is per definition inexperienced, sorry, but I feel like talking to a troll. C# needs a few more decades of maturement time before it can be called anything else than a niche language. And even after that, you'd HAVE to try everything else before anyone would consider you vaguely experienced.
I've met too many coders who think they're the shiznit just because they use one of the new hyped languages. If you'd tried them all, you probably wouldn't be using C#.
I'd go to the length to say, that if you've developed for Windows, and STILL not tried the alternatives, it means you must be a moron.
There's a very important point in being hostile to new languages if they don't bring anything useful to the table. So far there're only a zillion C++ copycats that just ignore all the problems that come with their changes, and on the other end of the spectrum there are the perl copycats. Everybody seems to have forgotten Lisp and derivatives.
So no, nothing new under the sun, and experienced people are still agreeing on the best tools while all the new people are yelling non-sensical things around them.
There's no therefore, since experienced users aren't those that you described. You can hardly call someone experienced if all their experiences are with the same thing.
In a world where everyone is a moron, then yes, what people use causes them to use it.
But among experienced users, something being better causes them to use it. Why is it so difficult to understand? Most things in the world aren't about taste, there simply are better alternatives to a lot of things. And once you've tried everything, you know what they are.
I was working on a project along these lines. Where UIs would be abstracted from applications as far as possible, so that they be user-configurable... but it's a huge undertaking. One of the first things we did was drop any notions of fancy but unnecessary technologies such as the web, xml, and rdbms. It needs to be simple, fast and work well. Anyhow, since the project is huge, I'm only working on a small part of it nowadays and don't expect to ever be finished:P
The real problem is that users are morons and admins are bureaucrats of the worst kind. None understand the other, so will likely impose their own will.
Users need to realize that their ipads (and any such walled garden device) are a source of grief in a workplace, even if you choose to ignore personal security.
Admins need to realize the whole concept of a locked down network is outdated and flawed. Same goes for antivirus. You can't keep the whole universe safe, but you can protect the things you care about. And those intelligent switches you cherish are also the main attack vector for intrusion, avoid if you can.
People with very little computer knowledge are the ones that should be locked down entirely, IMO to the point where they can't store any files at all, much less execute them, and don't have access to secrets. But labs, technical depts. etc. should be given free hands to shape their parts of a network. And no. companies do not need any all-pervasive policies unless you're a bureaucrat.
Yes, because out of the 5 zillion things to do with computers, everyone has been doing the exact same things.
That's like saying we have confirmation bias because we all like food, but hey, let's ignore the mountains of evidence and still say food is bad. And probably when 3rd world country peoples' economies improve, they will probably eat too, but prefer other stuff like tyres and coat hangers, not the stuff that us experienced food eaters like.
As I see it, grandma, is a hindrance to usability.
Grandma is just a state of evolution for users who recently started using computers. In general, more experienced users tend to like the same things (if you don't agree you're not experienced)
All users will grow beyond grandma, and what we'll be left with is a bunch of shitty software written for people who don't exist anymore..
seriously, rim, iphone, android, microsoft just offer different flavors of the same thing. the same walled garden with the same shitty appstores that only sell farting apps. the phones are in no way ergonomic to use, the only focus being quick to learn for the most basic tasks. I've tried each and each time still return to a good old symbian or n900 phone.
Slashdot Mirror
They got it wrong, Adam & Eve was a prediction!
It'd be more effective if we just put everyone in jail with forced labour and didn't give them any money to begin with.
I believe money laundering laws are at least one step beyond what most people regard a free society.
If the police can't deal with crime in an ethical way, why did we need them again?
Exactly my point.
Tell me, what's wrong with money laundering?
Clearly it seems people should only be allowed to spend their money in ways sanctioned by the government.
I hope they've factored in the 6 million dollars it'll cost to repair the pilot if there's a crash.
Also, Rudy Wells needs to be put on stand-by.
Why should it matter unless you're a loser who can't improve?
"That's pretty good" is a lie, and people who talk to you like that are not your friends. I'd get a new instructor if they talked down to me like that.
Microsoft was NOT the first to have tablets, I don't know who was, but clearly Apple made the Newton in 1993, which to this day outshines all tablets (including ipads) in several areas.
It was even able to recognise ordinary handwriting with no training at all, which at the time was an incredible feat.
Not that tablets are of any consequence, since they seem to have evolved into a pissing contest of who can sell the shittiest hardware, with least available software, for the most outrageous prices.
He did close it, and also made sure nobody gets out.
This should go under "Fraud" since there's no way he could kill all of those people in any reasonable amount of time.
Just because Tim tries to retroactively include everything and the kitchen sink in his definition, in the effort to promote his agenda, doesn't mean he isn't wrong.
Most people in the know would define the web strictly as the w3 standardised stuff that normally runs on ports 80 and 443.
Just because you can ftp:// in a url doesn't make it part of the web, it can't even link back.
Even if it did, you'd have a much stronger argument in arguing that PDF and MS-word documents, or Flash are part of the web too, which they clearly aren't.
ISPs have many times tried to cheat customers into accepting web-connections rather than internet-connections. AOL, compuserv etc?
The internet was designed to withstand a nuclear attack, clearly the web cannot.
Therefore we have some very compelling reasons to make a strong distinction between the words.
The web is an ugly confusing mess, don't drag the beautiful internet, that made it all possible, into it.
Wonderful, you just popped out of your world and ignored everything that's been said.
Access is a clever idea for a program, but it's very limited, has a severely buggy DB engine, and a scripting language meant for 3yr olds?
It's a well known fact that Access DBs lose lots of data very often and suddenly. You're lucky that there's probably some unlucky admin cleaning up the mess you cause.
Oh, and the free alternatives are better in every conceivable way.
Now, If you want to be the monkey mechanic who glues the steering wheel onto the car, be my guest. We can always hire "real programmers" instead.
Linux is pretty secure, works well and is easy to administer, Microsoft on the other hand is still trying to learn the basics of writing an OS.
When you show me a SINGLE distro, just one mind you, that not using any tricks can be updated from...oh lets say the 2005 release to current with ZERO breakage then you will have a valid argument.
Do you mean to imply that this is possible to accomplish, with any currently popular OS apart from Linux distros?
But since you asked, I can give you one, Gentoo.
I have boxes that automatically update fine since around a decade back, and they have always contained up to date versions of a huge amount of the currently most popular software, although they barely have enough hdd space now...
The Linux distro update fiasco you speak of; I believe it is entirely a consequence of having binary packages. Just see how many FOSS projects guarantee binary compatibility, and you will get the picture of why it's a bad idea.
Slackware teaches Unix, which is necessary for a complete understanding of the basics.
Gentoo is very complicated but offers unparallelled (and necessary) flexibility. And is the only (meta-) distro which can easily be maintained for years, and on different archs.
Once people know how to use it, they are equipped with dealing with any kind of problem they might encounter on their system.
Most other distros, are surprisingly similar.
* Binary package managers
* Offer only one or two well maintained archs
* Claim to be Easy to use (TM)
* Can often be administered in limited ways without actually understanding what you are doing.
* Hard to maintain over a longer period of time.
The Admins are also wrong,
Unix security isn't just a topic of discussion and a bunch of tools, it's a set of rules and assumptions that thousands of people seem to agree upon.
* There are 2 security levels: root and user.
* A user cannot do things which could harm any other user or the system.
* Harmful behaviour is defined by root. It's a chain of trust like so: everyone else -> root -> user
(root guarantees to the rest of the network that they will not, and will not allow users to do anything bad)
* Changing system configuration is always defined as harmful behaviour
* The user who administers the system also has a root account, which is used with more care than their normal account.
* Installing hardware is per definition changing the system configuration and always requires root access.
* In a different world, it'd probably be logical to filter all except local network access by users as well, since only the admin can really be liable. But in todays internet where nobody seems to be liable for anything, we can safely ignore this restriction.
Things have changed since then, and the "system" is nowadays a portable computer where the only user is also the admin. And any case where the user isn't given a root account as well, in effect *reduces* security, since otherwise the user will just put the system-sensitive stuff in their home directory if they can.
Still, there's a very good reason for at least 2 different security levels, it means the system can protect you from yourself, using your own guidance.
Now, the topic of printers; printers are hardware devices, but don't always need installing to be used.
If your printer is a network printer, and all you require is sending it postscript/pcl/pdf via a network protocol, and your user has unhindered network access. No hardware installation is necessary, and printing requires the same privileges you enjoy while sending e-mail.
If your printer is a usb/parallel device and your operating system already knows how to talk to it, in theory you could by default allow any user to access it. But it would be a very stupid default since it cannot be known which users on the system should have access to it, this is best left for root to configure correctly.
If it's a winprinter (a printer which requires a program from a manufacturer) and connects via usb/parallel, it would most definitely need root to install, since only the admin can make any kind of correct judgement in this case.
However, I don't see a reason why a network connected winprinter should need root privileges (although it's very rare to find such installers) and print systems aren't pre-configured this way, nothing is stopping *you* from doing it right now on any fairly ordinary system.
Printing hardware is nowadays unique, in that most printers adhere to standards which has made it possible to seemingly "install hardware" without configuring a system. ;)
People who think it should always "just work" aren't considering all the security aspects.
What if your attacker, an industrial spy, plants a rootkit on your printer? that'd compromise all printed documents from other user accounts as well.
Actually, strike that. Never trust a network, not even your own, and you're safe
You can draw your own conclusions or you can take mine: They were wrong not give Linus' girl a root account on her laptop, but Linus is also wrong to demand system configuration without a root account.
Many of us think that Final Fantasy 6 was the best game of all time. And that FF7, although good, was a bit of a disappointment when compared to its' three most recent predecessors :)
That's just a modern definition of snake oil.
If you don't show us your ingredients, so we can know whether it works or can kill you, it should be punishable by law to sell.
Your examples are not in any way related to this situation, a Chavy, Lada and Mercedes are all very similar things, which afaik have worked the same way since 60 yrs back, so of course the same mechanic can repair any of them. Now if you said engine repair, and diesel and petrol engine. then I might agree.
Comparing Windows to Linux is like comparing a car to a helicopter. One is more capable, but it's also more complicated to use and build.
Someone who has used only C# is per definition inexperienced, sorry, but I feel like talking to a troll. C# needs a few more decades of maturement time before it can be called anything else than a niche language. And even after that, you'd HAVE to try everything else before anyone would consider you vaguely experienced.
I've met too many coders who think they're the shiznit just because they use one of the new hyped languages.
If you'd tried them all, you probably wouldn't be using C#.
I'd go to the length to say, that if you've developed for Windows, and STILL not tried the alternatives, it means you must be a moron.
There's a very important point in being hostile to new languages if they don't bring anything useful to the table.
So far there're only a zillion C++ copycats that just ignore all the problems that come with their changes, and on the other end of the spectrum there are the perl copycats.
Everybody seems to have forgotten Lisp and derivatives.
So no, nothing new under the sun, and experienced people are still agreeing on the best tools while all the new people are yelling non-sensical things around them.
There's no therefore, since experienced users aren't those that you described.
You can hardly call someone experienced if all their experiences are with the same thing.
In a world where everyone is a moron, then yes, what people use causes them to use it.
But among experienced users, something being better causes them to use it. Why is it so difficult to understand?
Most things in the world aren't about taste, there simply are better alternatives to a lot of things.
And once you've tried everything, you know what they are.
But how can I donate to NK without buying shitty apple stuff?
I was working on a project along these lines. Where UIs would be abstracted from applications as far as possible, so that they be user-configurable... but it's a huge undertaking. :P
One of the first things we did was drop any notions of fancy but unnecessary technologies such as the web, xml, and rdbms.
It needs to be simple, fast and work well.
Anyhow, since the project is huge, I'm only working on a small part of it nowadays and don't expect to ever be finished
The real problem is that users are morons and admins are bureaucrats of the worst kind.
None understand the other, so will likely impose their own will.
Users need to realize that their ipads (and any such walled garden device) are a source of grief in a workplace, even if you choose to ignore personal security.
Admins need to realize the whole concept of a locked down network is outdated and flawed. Same goes for antivirus. You can't keep the whole universe safe, but you can protect the things you care about. And those intelligent switches you cherish are also the main attack vector for intrusion, avoid if you can.
People with very little computer knowledge are the ones that should be locked down entirely, IMO to the point where they can't store any files at all, much less execute them, and don't have access to secrets. But labs, technical depts. etc. should be given free hands to shape their parts of a network. And no. companies do not need any all-pervasive policies unless you're a bureaucrat.
Yes, because out of the 5 zillion things to do with computers, everyone has been doing the exact same things.
That's like saying we have confirmation bias because we all like food, but hey, let's ignore the mountains of evidence and still say food is bad.
And probably when 3rd world country peoples' economies improve, they will probably eat too, but prefer other stuff like tyres and coat hangers, not the stuff that us experienced food eaters like.
As I see it, grandma, is a hindrance to usability.
Grandma is just a state of evolution for users who recently started using computers. In general, more experienced users tend to like the same things (if you don't agree you're not experienced)
All users will grow beyond grandma, and what we'll be left with is a bunch of shitty software written for people who don't exist anymore..
seriously, rim, iphone, android, microsoft just offer different flavors of the same thing.
the same walled garden with the same shitty appstores that only sell farting apps.
the phones are in no way ergonomic to use, the only focus being quick to learn for the most basic tasks.
I've tried each and each time still return to a good old symbian or n900 phone.
Come on.. I wrote this up here so someone could find a flaw in my reasoning.
Since this solution is so obvious it should have been tried already.
Anyone?