But it's a library, which I would presume would mean that they want it to be a public service. What do they care if someone is or is not using it inside or out?
Be careful with the police. Often, their presence is enough to simply scare people into complying.
Often, police are right, and where they are doing their jobs within the letter and spirit, I'll support them. But sometimes, they can just end up taking a position. The bit where he was told to "move along", I'd have asked the officer for his badge number, name and the law that I was infringing.
I don't think so, but one thing is that it would definitely be quite "portable". That is, if I wanted to go on holiday and have a PC, this would do the job - a lot better than a big grey box and monitor. It could even work for lan party kit.
We typically brought down some services at 5am to recycle journals (IIRC could be done another way, but 5am was never an issue anyway) and occassionally had to take down some services to get an upgrade put in.
In fact, I never remember the machine actually crashing in a decade. The nearest thing we had was a disc head crash and that took out some data which we fixed that night.
Seeing how cognac glasses=DVD, is Jack saying I can go to Amazon, buy a standard DVD and start renting it out then? Great, because up until now, I thought I had to buy an expensive "rental" edition.
Or was the off-license breaking the law by renting out "retail" glasses?
What the industry don't understand is that people will buy things anyway.
The BBC sell huge numbers of videos/DVDs of their TV series like The Office. TV Series that were broadcast here. You are buying what you could have videotaped.
Look at things like outdoor concerts too - The Three Tenors was broadcast around the world, and yet is one of the biggest selling classical CDs ever.
Illegal copying by individuals is huge, including file sharing. It is crippling the whole entertainment industry. And still, Ben Affleck can afford to buy Jennifer Lopez an engagement ring worth a million bucks. That suggests to me that the impact of all this sharing isn't as big as some people would like to make out.
You forgot something - being an utter slave to fashion.
I've not seen that player before. But to me, if I wanted a big MP3 player, that would be it. Drop files on without a hunking bit of software, use it for transporting any files AND a built in radio (I like that).
I remember working in a mainframe department when our first NT server came in. It typically crashed about once a week where we had last had a crash about 2 years earlier.
If the mainframe went down, or even if one of our applications went offline, all hell broke loose and users went mad. They expected very high uptime.
Now, I notice that users don't seem to expect the same levels of uptime. They've become conditioned to software being down.
I find Microsoft's attitude to security infuriating. They seem to now be selling security as a bonus in a "look at how seriously we are taking it" when it should have been a gimme all along.
My attitude - a browser should be bullet proof. I shouldn't have a company saying "type in hyperlinks" or "be careful of the sites you visit". The browser is the window on the web and should protect the user, or it isn't doing its job. If a fault is found, it should be jumped on and fixed PDQ. The Mozilla guys can do it, so why can't a multi-billion dollar company?
But there is little that can be done about crime on a home, except putting security guards, barbed wire, dogs etc - the cost per home would be ludicrous.
Some homes in very good areas are targetted by professionals and generally people don't get through because of security measures.
The analogy doesn't work because hiring a security guard for every home is impossible. Security guards don't have a near-zero duplication cost. Software does though.
IMO Microsoft could do a whole lot more to improve their products.
Firstly, take out the vulnerabilities that are down to user running program.exe. That's just dumb.
However, when you buy certain goods (like a food processor), there is an expectation of reasonable protection for the user. My electric coffee grinder has a switch inside that requires the lid to be on to prevent accidents.
Some ideas....
More security by default. When you switch on your Windows XP machine, it should have the option to have everything locked down except for a connection to Windows Update. All the latest patches come down and then the machine unlocks itself. That way, people won't get owned machines before they even get a chance to patch.
User and admin accounts by default. Accidentally double clicking a dialler program should by default need a password inputting.
Much more sandboxing. Your screensaver example is a good one. It should run in nothing more than its directory. If it attempts to go outside, the crashes and tells the user.
I'm not saying that these behaviours shouldn't be amendable, just that the default should be a more resilient and protecting machine.
Regarding errors and "fishermen" out to get them, that's an unacceptable excuse. Have a look at the known vulnerabilities in IE vs those in Firefox. Firefox ones get fixed very quickly. Considering it is open source, people should be able to find vulnerabilities much easier.
Which update is he talking about? If it's that recent, it sounds like the one that allowed execution by shell://. The one that arguably is a Windows problem, and that Firefox is simply patching Windows.
I know what you mean about internal applications, but the small extra effort to make a site compliant for both at implementation would be a lot cheaper than doing it at a later stage.
Let's say that a company takes over another, and they run on Firefox. Immediately, you can bring them on stream.
To me, it's like buying a lot of pre-built PC systems. They may be cheaper, but come with some rubbish components for which there's only one driver. Upgrade your OS, and you'll be upgrading the hardware too.
I don't even see Metadata as that useful. Someone sends you a photo of a car. What's going to be in the metadata?
Let's say you want to find that photo of a red ford taurus you were sent? You might search for red Ford Taurus automobile, except that it was sent from the UK and is actually a scarlet Ford Granada car(I think that's the model equiv.), or it comes from France and ends up as a rouge Granada.
How about people just not bothering? Just out of interest, how many people actually put keywords in when saving word documents? Have a random sample of some on your office system and see how many there are? How many do people update when they make a radical change to a document?
Personally, I think it's quite a nice idea, but in practise, I don't see it working. Naming the files how I want and searching on that is the most accurate mechanism I know.
Presumably, there's no reason why you couldn't build something like this to work on top of Win XP anyway? Just have a.XML file at the end and have a spider that crawls through them and an application index?
I'm amazed at how many people can't form intelligent queries to google. When I show then how to do excludes and stuff, they are quite impressed.
People really won't know how to use these searches. Personally, I hate the search in XP. I prefer the one in Win 2K without the hand holding which gives me "search files".
A lot of people probably would say things like "yeah, but then people could go anywhere".
The bottom line is, they often won't. Businesses just don't want to muck around getting a free piece of software and then finding someone to configure it. They want black box solutions as a rule, particularly if the price is quite cheap.
You can do things like put page ads on, which a lot of people don't block. Most people are OK with them, where popup ads really do irritate nearly everyone.
The other thing is to use things like Newsletters to distribute update information.
I used to get a newsletter from a company which told me about any updates to a free component I used and also updates to their commercial components. I later bought one of their commercial products.
I wonder if plumbers sit around saying "you know what, I don't know why these loser businesses don't do their own plumbing. It's so easy."
People often simply don't want people doing things that aren't their job in business. Smart business owners don't want to do things that aren't the focus of their business because it takes their energy away from the things that are their business.
Slashdot Mirror
Loitering with intent is more generally a crime, though.
I'd be especially worried if Mother Teresa was doing it. I'm sure there's a law about dead people operating laptops.
But it's a library, which I would presume would mean that they want it to be a public service. What do they care if someone is or is not using it inside or out?
Often, police are right, and where they are doing their jobs within the letter and spirit, I'll support them. But sometimes, they can just end up taking a position. The bit where he was told to "move along", I'd have asked the officer for his badge number, name and the law that I was infringing.
I don't think the DB Engine is the issue. What's really the issue is report/form/menu design.
I don't think so, but one thing is that it would definitely be quite "portable". That is, if I wanted to go on holiday and have a PC, this would do the job - a lot better than a big grey box and monitor. It could even work for lan party kit.
Thanks. I'd just about talked myself out of not desiring one of these until you showed me this.
In fact, I never remember the machine actually crashing in a decade. The nearest thing we had was a disc head crash and that took out some data which we fixed that night.
Seeing how cognac glasses=DVD, is Jack saying I can go to Amazon, buy a standard DVD and start renting it out then? Great, because up until now, I thought I had to buy an expensive "rental" edition.
Or was the off-license breaking the law by renting out "retail" glasses?
The BBC sell huge numbers of videos/DVDs of their TV series like The Office. TV Series that were broadcast here. You are buying what you could have videotaped.
Look at things like outdoor concerts too - The Three Tenors was broadcast around the world, and yet is one of the biggest selling classical CDs ever.
Illegal copying by individuals is huge, including file sharing. It is crippling the whole entertainment industry. And still, Ben Affleck can afford to buy Jennifer Lopez an engagement ring worth a million bucks. That suggests to me that the impact of all this sharing isn't as big as some people would like to make out.
I've not seen that player before. But to me, if I wanted a big MP3 player, that would be it. Drop files on without a hunking bit of software, use it for transporting any files AND a built in radio (I like that).
If the mainframe went down, or even if one of our applications went offline, all hell broke loose and users went mad. They expected very high uptime.
Now, I notice that users don't seem to expect the same levels of uptime. They've become conditioned to software being down.
I find Microsoft's attitude to security infuriating. They seem to now be selling security as a bonus in a "look at how seriously we are taking it" when it should have been a gimme all along.
My attitude - a browser should be bullet proof. I shouldn't have a company saying "type in hyperlinks" or "be careful of the sites you visit". The browser is the window on the web and should protect the user, or it isn't doing its job. If a fault is found, it should be jumped on and fixed PDQ. The Mozilla guys can do it, so why can't a multi-billion dollar company?
Some homes in very good areas are targetted by professionals and generally people don't get through because of security measures.
The analogy doesn't work because hiring a security guard for every home is impossible. Security guards don't have a near-zero duplication cost. Software does though.
Firstly, take out the vulnerabilities that are down to user running program.exe. That's just dumb.
However, when you buy certain goods (like a food processor), there is an expectation of reasonable protection for the user. My electric coffee grinder has a switch inside that requires the lid to be on to prevent accidents.
Some ideas....
More security by default. When you switch on your Windows XP machine, it should have the option to have everything locked down except for a connection to Windows Update. All the latest patches come down and then the machine unlocks itself. That way, people won't get owned machines before they even get a chance to patch.
User and admin accounts by default. Accidentally double clicking a dialler program should by default need a password inputting.
Much more sandboxing. Your screensaver example is a good one. It should run in nothing more than its directory. If it attempts to go outside, the crashes and tells the user.
I'm not saying that these behaviours shouldn't be amendable, just that the default should be a more resilient and protecting machine.
Regarding errors and "fishermen" out to get them, that's an unacceptable excuse. Have a look at the known vulnerabilities in IE vs those in Firefox. Firefox ones get fixed very quickly. Considering it is open source, people should be able to find vulnerabilities much easier.
Which update is he talking about? If it's that recent, it sounds like the one that allowed execution by shell://. The one that arguably is a Windows problem, and that Firefox is simply patching Windows.
How odd that he didn't clarify that.
Let's say that a company takes over another, and they run on Firefox. Immediately, you can bring them on stream.
To me, it's like buying a lot of pre-built PC systems. They may be cheaper, but come with some rubbish components for which there's only one driver. Upgrade your OS, and you'll be upgrading the hardware too.
I've not tried it myself, but I think that the mail client in Opera does this.
Just a thought...
Let's say you want to find that photo of a red ford taurus you were sent? You might search for red Ford Taurus automobile, except that it was sent from the UK and is actually a scarlet Ford Granada car(I think that's the model equiv.), or it comes from France and ends up as a rouge Granada.
How about people just not bothering? Just out of interest, how many people actually put keywords in when saving word documents? Have a random sample of some on your office system and see how many there are? How many do people update when they make a radical change to a document?
Personally, I think it's quite a nice idea, but in practise, I don't see it working. Naming the files how I want and searching on that is the most accurate mechanism I know.
Presumably, there's no reason why you couldn't build something like this to work on top of Win XP anyway? Just have a .XML file at the end and have a spider that crawls through them and an application index?
People really won't know how to use these searches. Personally, I hate the search in XP. I prefer the one in Win 2K without the hand holding which gives me "search files".
The bottom line is, they often won't. Businesses just don't want to muck around getting a free piece of software and then finding someone to configure it. They want black box solutions as a rule, particularly if the price is quite cheap.
The other thing is to use things like Newsletters to distribute update information.
I used to get a newsletter from a company which told me about any updates to a free component I used and also updates to their commercial components. I later bought one of their commercial products.
It's not that you can't make money off it, it's that you have to buy into the philosophy of sharing the improvements and modifications.
People often simply don't want people doing things that aren't their job in business. Smart business owners don't want to do things that aren't the focus of their business because it takes their energy away from the things that are their business.