The only way companies that hold things so close to the chest can be influenced is by hurting their cash flow. This is capitalism in action. If they realize they are pissing people off with their attitude, and it is costing them money, then they will change. Until then, you can howl at the moon until the cows come home and they won't stop actively shutting out open source developers.
I would suggest that it might be an option to use the collective IT experience and position of Slashdotters to effect a boycot of firmware products from companies that only cooperate with MS based products. Or any hardware manufacturer that does this. If you have input to your company purchasing 5 or 5 million wireless cards (in this example) and TI or Intel is one option versus Realtek or Ralink or Zdas on the other... ***and they all do the job you require*** (regardless of whether you are installing them on an MS box, an Open Source box, or other) use your influence to buy from the group containing Realtek or Ralink or Zdas, or other manufacturer that supports open source. (Again, regardless of whether you are currently going to install them on a Windows box, Linux Box, Mac, OpenBSD, whatever... as long as it meets your needs, and they have a product that will also work on an open source box.)
If you aren't prepared to make the offending companies hurt in the pocketbook, then to quote Jim Carrey in the movie "Liar Liar", all you guys are:
..."going to do is piss and moan like an impotent jerk, and then bend over and take it up the tailpipe!"
Before we push any pawns or pass blame out, we should try to figure out why the other guy moved his piece where he did. Why is it being shut down?
"The current model for supporting maintenance distributions is being re-examined."
... by the way, we're closing the doors, get out.
That is a bit drastic for just re-examining something. So what is the real story?
I admit that the RHEL theory is a pretty good one. I am curious, are there any stats on how many people *don't* upgrade to new versions of Fedora right away when they come out. If the number is low, then why does this matter, since it really is a cooker type of system for Redhat?
Many don't like it, but Redhat is in business to pay the rent and put food on the table (and a BMW in the driveway and a swimming pool in the backyard if they are able). They are not in it for altruistic purposes. If you can't resolve yourself to this you are being naive and another distro is probably better for you. I used to pay every now and again for a boxed distro from either Redhat, Mandrake, or Suse (kind of like a donation for the work they do), but their customer support is so bad that I decided to just go for the free stuff since I usually fixed problems myself anyway (with free advice fro the 'net). Personally, if I could get good service, I would probably pay for a distro still... But not the inflated prices Redhat charge for what they essentially get for free.
I have been thinking of switching to Kubuntu anyway, so depending on what we find out this might just do it. (I like KDE better than Redhat's favourite Gnome anyway:-)
They're just annoying zealots who look and act EXACTLY like humans
I liked them better when they were not like humans. It gave a good bit of separation... the 'Us and Them' bit. As well, it was good to keep us off balance a bit since we didn't/couldn't understand them or know what motivated them, and therefore we didn't know what they would do next. To keep us on edge. When it gets predictable, it gets boring.
After the first two or three episodes this season I can't watch it any more (though I try occasionally). The litany of issues I have with it are numerous. What started killing it was my inability to suspend disbelief any more...
Things like the pilots, Starbuck in particular, can do any job: pilot, infanteer, reconnaissance, special agent, etc... bullshit! They are all specialities and take experience and training. That is why a pilot flies a plane and doesn't lead soldiers in the field.
What the fuck is up with a full colonel who is seemingly _always_ an idiot ( * that * doesn't * happen *... colonels have a LOT of power and don't get to that level if they are as stupid as they make Tigh always look)?
The never ending 'West Wing in Space' episodes HAVE to stop. They need some good battle episodes like 'Scar' were the Starbuck character was written much better.
How can a prisoner of the Cylons (who don't know where the fleet is) escape them, fly a Cylon raider (I thought that premise was B.S. before), find the fleet when he hasn't seen it from before the war, AND be believable even in scifi land... can't be done.
A doctor whose character was written from templates taken from *bad* B movies... probably the same place they get templates they use for Colonel Tigh's character.
What really killed it for me was when I turned on one show where they were running out of food, and the pilots were outarguing about divvying up food at the very beginning... WTF? They would get their food rationed, the same as others, and would likely get a better share since they are defenders. They are supposed to be professional military, not some back woods Texas militia members.
It just goes on and on until it stacks so high I can't take it any more. For the first one and a half seasons plus the pilot movie, it WAS the Best Show on Television. Now they are coasting and it is starting to smell.
They should get military advisers to help the writers with military stuff and scientific advisers for the science stuff. It may take place in space, but the military is not just about fighting, it also takes a very good ability to manage people, logistics, and situations. It uses a different kind of thought process than the pie in the sky thinking that these writers are using. If you want the fighters to be realistic, get someone who can help the writers put that kind of edge on it. The writers can do what they want with the soap opera crap they keep filling the show in with, but my suggestion would be to use those scripts to fire up the fire place on those cold wet Vancouver winter nights on Boundary Road.
Someone mod parent up more. As stated, DB access usually happens over an internal network (99% of the time) and only the outside interface of the web server is open to the public (assuming it is an app that is accessible to the world and not an internal app anyway). On bigger apps, only the model components on the backing app server(s) should be doing the DB access etc. and that should definitely be behind the firewall along with the DB. In all cases if the firewalled internal network is compromised, you are really screwed anyway, so what does encryption etc. matter? Unless you don't trust the people who administer your apps and can wreck you business more easily by not doing backups and using a baseball bat on the hard drives or something equally brutal.
Notable differences: 3 downs not 4 (so more passing, the reason why Flutie, Moon, and other CFL graduates can scramble well); no 'fair catch' (the defense has to give 5 yards, and the receiver has to field the ball); Goal Posts are at the *front* of the endzone (the ball is still in play if a field goal is missed... more interesting that way);CFL has 12 players on the field, NFL has 11 players on the field.
Goal posts are the same as in the NFL (with the exception of where they are located)
I'm thinking it's a distribution thing. If I am right, bad for the equator. If you are right, all coastal dwellers learn to swim at the same time. Bad deal overall.
I'm curious. Since the Indian Ocean is around the level of the equator, wouldn't the rising sea level be greater there due to a greater centrifugal force? i.e. The same reason the earth has an
equatorial bulge. This would then make sense of islands in the Indian Ocean and Pacific becoming inundated while places closer to the poles are not affected as much. It would also mean the an average rise of a few centimetres might translate to something greater at the equator. It would be nice to hear some accurate numbers regarding ocean levels at the equator versus the poles; historic and current.
Szulik wasn't saying everything is OK now, he was just stating a set of facts. This story doesn't really have to do with the original Novell-Microsoft agreement story. It was about Szulik saying the news about "Microsoft's announcement of three joint customers with Novell this week" is really non-news.
It depends on what you mean by measurable brain irregularities. Do you mean just physical irregularities? It is widely recognized that chemical imbalances are responsible for most if not all depressions, schizophrenias, etc. In this case I think the words irregularity and imbalance are synonymous (and no laxative jokes:-).
If you mean only physical irregularity there is the famous case of Phineas Gage, the 19th century railway worker who had a tamping iron shot through his head during a construction accident. He went from being a conscientious hard worker to a an unstable sometimes violent person. This shows that physical forces on the brain itself can cause behavioural changes. In another case I read about during the late 1980s or early 1990s, there was a fellow who over time became increasingly violent and eventually committed a violent murder (he was for most of his life, peaceful in nature). His behavioural problems were cured when a brain tumour was removed (I wish it was easier to find old news articles like this on the internet... but I am certain of this story... unless I have a brain tumour). The bottom line is that I don't see how you can dismiss then the possibility that brain tumours, which put unnatural physical pressure and stress on parts of the brain, could not also cause behavioural changes or abnormalities.
In any case the fact that brain tumours can affect behaviour (I do believe it) can also help to prove your point on free will. Since our brains are what give us our perception and understanding of the world, and its make up affects how we think or act, we may have free will but don't recognize it because we can't, or we recognize it but can't do anything with it because some limitation of our brain prevents us. Kind of like a Schroedinger's uncertainty principle of life.
Anyway, if the guy had free will he should be jailed to punish him. If he did not because of a brain tumour, he should be jailed/hospitalized/removed-from-society because he cannot control himself and the public needs to be protected (until such time they can show conclusively that the tumour removal changed his behaviour). If they can conclusively show they cured him, then release him.
I only hear about drug development by universities who are financed to a great degree by the government (buildings, infrastructure, salaries of support workers, and many time 100% of the basic research). Then near the end of the work when they have proved they have something worth looking at, the drug companies come in and contribute on the last bit and claim they did it all. Meanwhile it is widely documented that most of the money the drug companies spend is on marketing and making minor changes to existing medications that can be patented and marketed as the next big thing.
I agree with the concept that if you have put money into developing something, you should be able to enjoys the fruits. However, if a company enjoys the fruits of university financed research, they should not be allowed to enjoy it so much at the expense of the public who financed most of it. Also, if a patent is granted, it should be for something really novel, not just something like an upsell of Zocor (a good example in one of the other posts). Either that or a reduced patent length for these kinds of upsell 'innovations'. I really don't believe the drug companies put as much money into research as you try to make out.
I have seen and done the same/similar when a finger was wrecked (I used to play in clubs, so knew a lot of musicians), so I believe it. There was one guy I knew who used to always have blobs of it on his fingers. I don't know what he was doing to them to warrant that much super glue.
I know a lot of guitarists use it to fix a split fingernail or a hangnail. It works well. Slap a bunch on to an inflamed hangnail or a cut and you can play painless in no time. Just remember to wait a few minutes till it is really dry or you'll be bending that note all night.
Read the post (I know some poor souls, just like you, don't have good comprehension so I'll repeat this part:
...if it weren't for Google and other search engines...
Now I'll explain it: other search engines mean things like Yahoo and AltaVista, etc. If you couldn't figure that out it's a good thing you can use search engines to point your life in some sort of a direction.
Finally, we were using the 'internet' where I worked before it was commercialized in '91. I used to work in chemical process R&D and we used it during our research projects.
You have it backwards i.e. Google != Hypocritcal
on
Google Deprecates SOAP API
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
One could argue that if it weren't for Google and other search engines, no one would ever know of about 90% of the web content put out by businesses and individuals. People and businesses who wanted to get *their* word out would have shrivelled up and died on the vine since no-one would ever have heard them calling. Since Google provides a service to those web sites, your argument could be considered spurious and therefore moot. If anything, those web sites owe Google, not the other way around as you contend.
Apply for a bank account/credit card... identity theft stuff. A passport is prime ID. I believe you can do as much with it as with a birth certificate (probably more since you cannot use a birth certificate to get back into the U.S. by air and soon by ground as well). In fact, I wouldn't doubt that you could order a duplicate birth certificate with it... or maybe go to a social security office with it and claim you lost your SSN card and would like to know the number. You could probably cause a lot of problems. Or if you were a terrorist from say Iran, you could fake a U.S. citizenship and get into the country without a hassle. Theft of someone's identity is very serious.
And if they mess up the systems dealing with passports when they become required for all entries to the U.S. including ground entry from Mexico and Canada (and they *will* be required, it was just delayed for a year for ground crossings) there could be a HUGE impact. They are America's two biggest trading partners accounting for something like half of all foreign trade (Canada is the U.S.'s biggest trading partner... Mexico I believe is a close second and maybe soon to pass the Canadians). What if, for example, the trucks all of a sudden couldn't roll across the border because the driver's passports were messed up (in either direction by the way... what American driver is going to want to leave if he/she can't get back in)?
So what are you supposed to tell your readers? Here are some guys opinions, but he is very left wing and hates proprietary software so everything he will say about it is negative? But don't worry, he will give a good review on open source material? That is a crock. So now the reader will read a bad review on a potentially good piece of proprietary software that would solve the readers requirements for a software package. And he might read in the same article a recommendation to use instead an open source [quote]equivalent[unquote] piece of open source software, even if it doesn't even remotely meet the requirements of the reader for some reason. But the reader won't know any of this. Who cares if I know the reviews are biased against proprietary software, I just want an accurate review.
They need to find someone who can or has established a reputation for trying to be unbiased. Granted, easier said than done. In the modern American (and Canadian... and probably any of the top industrialized nations), honesty in business is not a priority. Only maintaining a feigned image of ethics is (which makes me want to vomit when companies force their employees to take ethics training... but that is another story).
Slashdot Mirror
Either that or you'll never have to ask anyone to help light your cigarette again.
The only way companies that hold things so close to the chest can be influenced is by hurting their cash flow. This is capitalism in action. If they realize they are pissing people off with their attitude, and it is costing them money, then they will change. Until then, you can howl at the moon until the cows come home and they won't stop actively shutting out open source developers.
I would suggest that it might be an option to use the collective IT experience and position of Slashdotters to effect a boycot of firmware products from companies that only cooperate with MS based products. Or any hardware manufacturer that does this. If you have input to your company purchasing 5 or 5 million wireless cards (in this example) and TI or Intel is one option versus Realtek or Ralink or Zdas on the other... ***and they all do the job you require*** (regardless of whether you are installing them on an MS box, an Open Source box, or other) use your influence to buy from the group containing Realtek or Ralink or Zdas, or other manufacturer that supports open source. (Again, regardless of whether you are currently going to install them on a Windows box, Linux Box, Mac, OpenBSD, whatever... as long as it meets your needs, and they have a product that will also work on an open source box.)
If you aren't prepared to make the offending companies hurt in the pocketbook, then to quote Jim Carrey in the movie "Liar Liar", all you guys are:
end of story.Look at the title bar of the Fedora Project web page. It says: "Sponsored by Red Hat Linux"
Follow the money, that is where the control will be found.
Before we push any pawns or pass blame out, we should try to figure out why the other guy moved his piece where he did. Why is it being shut down?
... by the way, we're closing the doors, get out.
That is a bit drastic for just re-examining something. So what is the real story?
I admit that the RHEL theory is a pretty good one. I am curious, are there any stats on how many people *don't* upgrade to new versions of Fedora right away when they come out. If the number is low, then why does this matter, since it really is a cooker type of system for Redhat?
Many don't like it, but Redhat is in business to pay the rent and put food on the table (and a BMW in the driveway and a swimming pool in the backyard if they are able). They are not in it for altruistic purposes. If you can't resolve yourself to this you are being naive and another distro is probably better for you. I used to pay every now and again for a boxed distro from either Redhat, Mandrake, or Suse (kind of like a donation for the work they do), but their customer support is so bad that I decided to just go for the free stuff since I usually fixed problems myself anyway (with free advice fro the 'net). Personally, if I could get good service, I would probably pay for a distro still... But not the inflated prices Redhat charge for what they essentially get for free.
I have been thinking of switching to Kubuntu anyway, so depending on what we find out this might just do it. (I like KDE better than Redhat's favourite Gnome anyway :-)
I liked them better when they were not like humans. It gave a good bit of separation... the 'Us and Them' bit. As well, it was good to keep us off balance a bit since we didn't/couldn't understand them or know what motivated them, and therefore we didn't know what they would do next. To keep us on edge. When it gets predictable, it gets boring.
After the first two or three episodes this season I can't watch it any more (though I try occasionally). The litany of issues I have with it are numerous. What started killing it was my inability to suspend disbelief any more...
It just goes on and on until it stacks so high I can't take it any more. For the first one and a half seasons plus the pilot movie, it WAS the Best Show on Television. Now they are coasting and it is starting to smell.
They should get military advisers to help the writers with military stuff and scientific advisers for the science stuff. It may take place in space, but the military is not just about fighting, it also takes a very good ability to manage people, logistics, and situations. It uses a different kind of thought process than the pie in the sky thinking that these writers are using. If you want the fighters to be realistic, get someone who can help the writers put that kind of edge on it. The writers can do what they want with the soap opera crap they keep filling the show in with, but my suggestion would be to use those scripts to fire up the fire place on those cold wet Vancouver winter nights on Boundary Road.
No... what a stupid question.
Someone mod parent up more. As stated, DB access usually happens over an internal network (99% of the time) and only the outside interface of the web server is open to the public (assuming it is an app that is accessible to the world and not an internal app anyway). On bigger apps, only the model components on the backing app server(s) should be doing the DB access etc. and that should definitely be behind the firewall along with the DB. In all cases if the firewalled internal network is compromised, you are really screwed anyway, so what does encryption etc. matter? Unless you don't trust the people who administer your apps and can wreck you business more easily by not doing backups and using a baseball bat on the hard drives or something equally brutal.
It is kind of moot anyway... if the attacker can get at the file system, they probably can do whatever they want.
Canadian Football Field Dimensions
So where else are supposed to get milk shakes?
I'm thinking it's a distribution thing. If I am right, bad for the equator. If you are right, all coastal dwellers learn to swim at the same time. Bad deal overall.
I'm curious. Since the Indian Ocean is around the level of the equator, wouldn't the rising sea level be greater there due to a greater centrifugal force? i.e. The same reason the earth has an equatorial bulge. This would then make sense of islands in the Indian Ocean and Pacific becoming inundated while places closer to the poles are not affected as much. It would also mean the an average rise of a few centimetres might translate to something greater at the equator. It would be nice to hear some accurate numbers regarding ocean levels at the equator versus the poles; historic and current.
Szulik wasn't saying everything is OK now, he was just stating a set of facts. This story doesn't really have to do with the original Novell-Microsoft agreement story. It was about Szulik saying the news about "Microsoft's announcement of three joint customers with Novell this week" is really non-news.
It depends on what you mean by measurable brain irregularities. Do you mean just physical irregularities? It is widely recognized that chemical imbalances are responsible for most if not all depressions, schizophrenias, etc. In this case I think the words irregularity and imbalance are synonymous (and no laxative jokes :-).
If you mean only physical irregularity there is the famous case of Phineas Gage, the 19th century railway worker who had a tamping iron shot through his head during a construction accident. He went from being a conscientious hard worker to a an unstable sometimes violent person. This shows that physical forces on the brain itself can cause behavioural changes. In another case I read about during the late 1980s or early 1990s, there was a fellow who over time became increasingly violent and eventually committed a violent murder (he was for most of his life, peaceful in nature). His behavioural problems were cured when a brain tumour was removed (I wish it was easier to find old news articles like this on the internet... but I am certain of this story... unless I have a brain tumour). The bottom line is that I don't see how you can dismiss then the possibility that brain tumours, which put unnatural physical pressure and stress on parts of the brain, could not also cause behavioural changes or abnormalities.
In any case the fact that brain tumours can affect behaviour (I do believe it) can also help to prove your point on free will. Since our brains are what give us our perception and understanding of the world, and its make up affects how we think or act, we may have free will but don't recognize it because we can't, or we recognize it but can't do anything with it because some limitation of our brain prevents us. Kind of like a Schroedinger's uncertainty principle of life.
Anyway, if the guy had free will he should be jailed to punish him. If he did not because of a brain tumour, he should be jailed/hospitalized/removed-from-society because he cannot control himself and the public needs to be protected (until such time they can show conclusively that the tumour removal changed his behaviour). If they can conclusively show they cured him, then release him.
I only hear about drug development by universities who are financed to a great degree by the government (buildings, infrastructure, salaries of support workers, and many time 100% of the basic research). Then near the end of the work when they have proved they have something worth looking at, the drug companies come in and contribute on the last bit and claim they did it all. Meanwhile it is widely documented that most of the money the drug companies spend is on marketing and making minor changes to existing medications that can be patented and marketed as the next big thing.
I agree with the concept that if you have put money into developing something, you should be able to enjoys the fruits. However, if a company enjoys the fruits of university financed research, they should not be allowed to enjoy it so much at the expense of the public who financed most of it. Also, if a patent is granted, it should be for something really novel, not just something like an upsell of Zocor (a good example in one of the other posts). Either that or a reduced patent length for these kinds of upsell 'innovations'. I really don't believe the drug companies put as much money into research as you try to make out.
I have seen and done the same/similar when a finger was wrecked (I used to play in clubs, so knew a lot of musicians), so I believe it. There was one guy I knew who used to always have blobs of it on his fingers. I don't know what he was doing to them to warrant that much super glue.
I know a lot of guitarists use it to fix a split fingernail or a hangnail. It works well. Slap a bunch on to an inflamed hangnail or a cut and you can play painless in no time. Just remember to wait a few minutes till it is really dry or you'll be bending that note all night.
Now I'll explain it: other search engines mean things like Yahoo and AltaVista, etc. If you couldn't figure that out it's a good thing you can use search engines to point your life in some sort of a direction.
Finally, we were using the 'internet' where I worked before it was commercialized in '91. I used to work in chemical process R&D and we used it during our research projects.
:-p
One could argue that if it weren't for Google and other search engines, no one would ever know of about 90% of the web content put out by businesses and individuals. People and businesses who wanted to get *their* word out would have shrivelled up and died on the vine since no-one would ever have heard them calling. Since Google provides a service to those web sites, your argument could be considered spurious and therefore moot. If anything, those web sites owe Google, not the other way around as you contend.
But my understanding is that the U.S. wants to use RFID passports too. Or am I mistaken?
Apply for a bank account/credit card... identity theft stuff. A passport is prime ID. I believe you can do as much with it as with a birth certificate (probably more since you cannot use a birth certificate to get back into the U.S. by air and soon by ground as well). In fact, I wouldn't doubt that you could order a duplicate birth certificate with it... or maybe go to a social security office with it and claim you lost your SSN card and would like to know the number. You could probably cause a lot of problems. Or if you were a terrorist from say Iran, you could fake a U.S. citizenship and get into the country without a hassle. Theft of someone's identity is very serious.
And if they mess up the systems dealing with passports when they become required for all entries to the U.S. including ground entry from Mexico and Canada (and they *will* be required, it was just delayed for a year for ground crossings) there could be a HUGE impact. They are America's two biggest trading partners accounting for something like half of all foreign trade (Canada is the U.S.'s biggest trading partner... Mexico I believe is a close second and maybe soon to pass the Canadians). What if, for example, the trucks all of a sudden couldn't roll across the border because the driver's passports were messed up (in either direction by the way... what American driver is going to want to leave if he/she can't get back in)?
So what are you supposed to tell your readers? Here are some guys opinions, but he is very left wing and hates proprietary software so everything he will say about it is negative? But don't worry, he will give a good review on open source material? That is a crock. So now the reader will read a bad review on a potentially good piece of proprietary software that would solve the readers requirements for a software package. And he might read in the same article a recommendation to use instead an open source [quote]equivalent[unquote] piece of open source software, even if it doesn't even remotely meet the requirements of the reader for some reason. But the reader won't know any of this. Who cares if I know the reviews are biased against proprietary software, I just want an accurate review.
They need to find someone who can or has established a reputation for trying to be unbiased. Granted, easier said than done. In the modern American (and Canadian... and probably any of the top industrialized nations), honesty in business is not a priority. Only maintaining a feigned image of ethics is (which makes me want to vomit when companies force their employees to take ethics training... but that is another story).