You've got your parties reversed bucko. In general it's the democrats which back the the anti-consumer copyright laws and side with major labels and content producers against the consumer, and the republicans who attempt (however half-heartedly) to support individual rights and liberties.
You're point is still very good, and i think that you're correct, but your silly insertion of (thuthless) propaganda is offensive.
"The risk that a researcher could go to jail for giving a speech at an academic conference is essentially zero," says Orin Kerr, a law professor at George Washington University and a former prosecutor for the Justice Department. In fact, Kerr says, it makes sense to take opponents' claims about the scope of the copyright law with a grain of salt.
Tell that too the poor russion programmer from elksoft, or the folks over at 2600. The fact of the matter is, the abusive powers granted by the DMCA are infact... being abused! go figure.
Ok, all of your disagreements amounted to: "It doesn't affect me so i don't know but it shouldn't change anway", "I'm too lazy to learn a new way.", and "I can't think of a better way so there must no be one."
About the most useless and long commentary i've seen in a while.
Of course this response entire can be summed up as "You're dumb" and thus isn't real useful, but yeesh.
Um.. lets try this statement. How can something not be a bolt if you used a wrench to put it in.
Well, i have a long history of using wrenches that were handy to pound in nails. That doesn't make the nail a bolt.
Design dictates the style of the program, not the features of the language. Just like a wrench used to bash in a nail, doesn't make a nail a bolt.
If i write a structured procedural program in a Pure-OO language, it remains, a structured procedural program, and none of the features of the language can change that.
Granted, it's pounding a nail in with a wrench, but it's still a nail, not a bolt.
If it were a Bachelor of Cheese degree handed out by the same institution would it make a difference?
Labeling it as "science" does not change the culture it exists in, or the expectations software projects exist under.
These are the things that make software less reliable, and software engineers, less like "real" engineers.
Software projects tend to exist under time, and budget constraints that a hardware project manager would laugh at.
As has been noted earlier, until the expectations of software are raised in general, the performance of software, in general, will barely meet them or fall just short. And the community that develops it will mirror that.
I really am curious as to what counts as an attack. I'd forgotten one of my webservers and it's been running for a year or so, and when i checked the logs recently there were close to 11,000 nimbda/coderead/whatever iis bounces in my apache error_log.
This is something we've been looking at doing for our offices as well... we only have one problem. We can't find good information (or even any really) on enterprise administration.
How do you centralize logins? i've heard and read about pam_ldap etc. but i haven't been able to find examples of anyone who's actually done it.
We need centralized user management and file management... something equivalent to the NT domain model, where the entire group can be managed by changing one datastore.
The peices to put something together like this are all out there, but i can't seem to find anyone who's done it.
At anyrate, the MSCTT ests in PT... that last PT means Preview Tookit... which means, beta beta beta....
Beta MS softwre is like anyone elses pre-alpha software. Don't even touch this till it gets past version 2.0 (or till the third release, based on whatever hokeyness they're bumping their version numbers around with).
Yes unix came first. Yes unix developed a very interested and loyal developer base. It is a fraction of the size of the windows developer base. A small fraction.
In the years between windows 3.1 and windows 98 more code was written for win32 then i think has ever existed for unix.
There are many, many reasons for this, but the largest one is because the movement reinforce itself. I know many of you are hooked in varous incarnations of VI and EMACS and what have you, but none of them are comparible tools to Visual Studio.
And this is a trend that has been going on for a while. Borland and other companies like Spinner+ and gupta made windows development cake. And since windows was on the desktop it was peoples first introduction to computers and people who might of wanted to make something would make it for... windows...
Tool addiction is what keeps a large number of developres tied to Microsoft. Regressing from visual studio to emacs is a painful wrenching experience. Regressing to vi is simply intollerable.
Put more support into Active sate, KDE Studio, gIDE (which seems to have disappeared) and the like. Buy kylix. That's the root to acceptence. Make things real people can develop with.
No. It should absolutely not be cultural based. "cultural" programs have a long and sordid history of complete failure. What I mean by "cultural programs" is programs who's focus is specifically and by design on the interaction of groups from different usually arbitrarily defined social groups, for example, the Camp David experiment with the Israeli and Palestinian children.
Cultural exchange and interaction is an incidental effect of lots of other things. It's only possible when people already have an interest in each other for more personally motivating reasons.
Example? Chess. Lots of cultural and philosophical interchange happens between chess players because they share a passion. When they meet people who share that passion with them and who in interesting within that context they naturally try to enlarge the context: who are you, where are you from, what's it like to be Swahili or Pakistani or American, or whatever...
But placing the focus on cultural interchange is dooming a project to failure. Firstly, it does so because most people (let alone children) do not identify strongly motivational level with their cultural groups. How often have you heard a programmer say, "I program because I'm a Jew", or an athlete say I wrestle because I'm Chinese? Secondly, because if that "cultural" is the context, people - regardless of intentions - will try to find things that motivate them. Their stereotype themselves in order fit with what they perceive as their grouping (ethnic, cultural, national). This results in talented programmers not talking about programming because they're a Cossack and Cossacks are warriors and programming is beneath any good Cossack. And thirdly, once you've established that context you make it irrelevant by claiming equality and just confuse everyone.
Base it on soccer.
Base it on chess.
Base it on a proper appreciation of falling snowflakes in summer.
And what happens when your package database gets
corrupted?
Arguing strictly from the point of view of strong packagemanagement is so narrow as to be pointless as you accuse this entire thread of being.
I'm still trying to figure out who thought you were "insightful" so i can make sure i never meat them.
there is some strangeness here...
on
Shared Source?
·
· Score: 1
I don't like the GPL personally either... however the lisence that most commecial software developers nee to know about is not the GPL... It's really not relevent to them. The lisence they need to know about, is the LGPL, which gives them complete freedom to do whatever they want as long as they don't change the library they link too.
The LGPL is a much much better lisence than the GPL, imho, and is completely ignored by microsoft in this sence.
All i have to say about thier shared-source mess is: whatever.
They're missing the whole point of why developers bother... it's because they know thier code will always be out there.
If the shared source lisence made a provision that all the source it was held under would ALWAYS be availabe... then it would be interesting.
The short of it however is, that if you work on shared source programes you 1) will still have to PAY for the software you write and work on, and 2) you are not garountee'd the ability to work on that software in perpetuity...
Use the LGPL. Forget Shared source, it's an unimport waste of marketing time.
What is the word "fact", but a social construct with perceptive meaning.
The "fact" of the matter is, most people either are not able to tell the difference, or recognize that there IS a difference, between a fact in the untouchable objective world, and a fact created by concensus.
Slashdot Mirror
I am also utterly unable to spell.
%s/thuthless/truthless
mutter, i suck.
You've got your parties reversed bucko.
In general it's the democrats which back the the anti-consumer copyright laws and side with major labels and content producers against the consumer, and the republicans who attempt (however half-heartedly) to support individual rights and liberties.
You're point is still very good, and i think that you're correct, but your silly insertion of (thuthless) propaganda is offensive.
-T
-T
yes, but command-v is a stupid combination.
Or even worse... check out this one:
"The risk that a researcher could go to jail for giving a speech at an academic conference is essentially zero," says Orin Kerr, a law professor at George Washington University and a former prosecutor for the Justice Department. In fact, Kerr says, it makes sense to take opponents' claims about the scope of the copyright law with a grain of salt.
Tell that too the poor russion programmer from elksoft, or the folks over at 2600. The fact of the matter is, the abusive powers granted by the DMCA are infact... being abused! go figure.
-T
Wow.
Ok, all of your disagreements amounted to: "It doesn't affect me so i don't know but it shouldn't change anway", "I'm too lazy to learn a new way.", and "I can't think of a better way so there must no be one."
About the most useless and long commentary i've seen in a while.
Of course this response entire can be summed up as "You're dumb" and thus isn't real useful, but yeesh.
Wow.
Um.. lets try this statement.
How can something not be a bolt if you used a wrench to put it in.
Well, i have a long history of using wrenches that were handy to pound in nails. That doesn't make the nail a bolt.
Design dictates the style of the program, not the features of the language. Just like a wrench used to bash in a nail, doesn't make a nail a bolt.
If i write a structured procedural program in a Pure-OO language, it remains, a structured procedural program, and none of the features of the language can change that.
Granted, it's pounding a nail in with a wrench, but it's still a nail, not a bolt.
-T
You can absolutely write a Non-OO program in a Pure-OO language.
:)
each "class" is used only as a namespace for static functions and embedded classes that only contain public fields.
Then start writing in nice happy procedural method or some such thing.
-T
If it were a Bachelor of Cheese degree handed out by the same institution would it make a difference?
Labeling it as "science" does not change the culture it exists in, or the expectations software projects exist under.
These are the things that make software less reliable, and software engineers, less like "real" engineers.
Software projects tend to exist under time, and budget constraints that a hardware project manager would laugh at.
As has been noted earlier, until the expectations of software are raised in general, the performance of software, in general, will barely meet them or fall just short. And the community that develops it will mirror that.
I really am curious as to what counts as an attack. I'd forgotten one of my webservers and it's been running for a year or so, and when i checked the logs recently there were close to 11,000 nimbda/coderead/whatever iis bounces in my apache error_log.
What's that count as?
You are dumber, and can't write. How did you manage to post?
Baloney.
They sell their hardware at an obnoxious markup.
TCO for a business a mac might be worth it.
But it rarely will for a home user.
You know, i get all of those points you mentioned with my hyundai accent... except my warranty is longer.
Talley Ho!
-T
You haven't been working with intel processors for the last 2 years or so have you.
The celeray stalks of old were the last intel CPU's that you could do this with in any significant fasion.
This is something we've been looking at doing for our offices as well... we only have one problem. We can't find good information (or even any really) on enterprise administration.
How do you centralize logins? i've heard and read about pam_ldap etc. but i haven't been able to find examples of anyone who's actually done it.
We need centralized user management and file management... something equivalent to the NT domain model, where the entire group can be managed by changing one datastore.
The peices to put something together like this are all out there, but i can't seem to find anyone who's done it.
help?
-T
if i had a couple of moderator points like i did yesterday, i'd mod your ass up.
whee
-T
*cough* troll^H^H^H^H^HKamra Whore ESC :dd
:)
hrm.
Troll Whore?
Karma Troll?
you my friend, are a new paradigm
-T
wow cut and paste karma whoring.
At anyrate, the MSCTT ests in PT... that last PT means Preview Tookit... which means, beta beta beta....
Beta MS softwre is like anyone elses pre-alpha software. Don't even touch this till it gets past version 2.0 (or till the third release, based on whatever hokeyness they're bumping their version numbers around with).
Not so not so not so.
Yes unix came first. Yes unix developed a very interested and loyal developer base. It is a fraction of the size of the windows developer base. A small fraction.
In the years between windows 3.1 and windows 98 more code was written for win32 then i think has ever existed for unix.
There are many, many reasons for this, but the largest one is because the movement reinforce itself. I know many of you are hooked in varous incarnations of VI and EMACS and what have you, but none of them are comparible tools to Visual Studio.
And this is a trend that has been going on for a while. Borland and other companies like Spinner+ and gupta made windows development cake. And since windows was on the desktop it was peoples first introduction to computers and people who might of wanted to make something would make it for... windows...
Tool addiction is what keeps a large number of developres tied to Microsoft. Regressing from visual studio to emacs is a painful wrenching experience. Regressing to vi is simply intollerable.
Put more support into Active sate, KDE Studio, gIDE (which seems to have disappeared) and the like. Buy kylix. That's the root to acceptence. Make things real people can develop with.
-Tilde
No. It should absolutely not be cultural based. "cultural" programs have a long and sordid history of complete failure. What I mean by "cultural programs" is programs who's focus is specifically and by design on the interaction of groups from different usually arbitrarily defined social groups, for example, the Camp David experiment with the Israeli and Palestinian children.
Cultural exchange and interaction is an incidental effect of lots of other things. It's only possible when people already have an interest in each other for more personally motivating reasons.
Example? Chess. Lots of cultural and philosophical interchange happens between chess players because they share a passion. When they meet people who share that passion with them and who in interesting within that context they naturally try to enlarge the context: who are you, where are you from, what's it like to be Swahili or Pakistani or American, or whatever...
But placing the focus on cultural interchange is dooming a project to failure. Firstly, it does so because most people (let alone children) do not identify strongly motivational level with their cultural groups. How often have you heard a programmer say, "I program because I'm a Jew", or an athlete say I wrestle because I'm Chinese? Secondly, because if that "cultural" is the context, people - regardless of intentions - will try to find things that motivate them. Their stereotype themselves in order fit with what they perceive as their grouping (ethnic, cultural, national). This results in talented programmers not talking about programming because they're a Cossack and Cossacks are warriors and programming is beneath any good Cossack. And thirdly, once you've established that context you make it irrelevant by claiming equality and just confuse everyone.
Base it on soccer.
Base it on chess.
Base it on a proper appreciation of falling snowflakes in summer.
Whatever, but don't force a "cultural" basis.
And what happens when your package database gets
corrupted?
Arguing strictly from the point of view of strong packagemanagement is so narrow as to be pointless as you accuse this entire thread of being.
I'm still trying to figure out who thought you were "insightful" so i can make sure i never meat them.
I don't like the GPL personally either... however the lisence that most commecial software developers nee to know about is not the GPL... It's really not relevent to them. The lisence they need to know about, is the LGPL, which gives them complete freedom to do whatever they want as long as they don't change the library they link too.
The LGPL is a much much better lisence than the GPL, imho, and is completely ignored by microsoft in this sence.
All i have to say about thier shared-source mess is: whatever.
They're missing the whole point of why developers bother... it's because they know thier code will always be out there.
If the shared source lisence made a provision that all the source it was held under would ALWAYS be availabe... then it would be interesting.
The short of it however is, that if you work on shared source programes you 1) will still have to PAY for the software you write and work on, and 2) you are not garountee'd the ability to work on that software in perpetuity...
Use the LGPL. Forget Shared source, it's an unimport waste of marketing time.
-T
Actually, i usually stick in an address at the domain i'm signing in at....
For example... say i'm getting free acrobat reader, and they want my email address, i just
fill in jsmith@adobe.com
-Grin
Actually i hadn't, i'm not a math nerd, and wasn't aware that nerdyness depended upon a knowledge of mathematics.
Regardless, math is much less murkey than spoken language.
What is the word "fact", but a social construct with perceptive meaning.
The "fact" of the matter is, most people either are not able to tell the difference, or recognize that there IS a difference, between a fact in the untouchable objective world, and a fact created by concensus.
Sure they are.
What else is a fact, but a bundeled up parcel of knowledge with an accepted meaning, usually in a causal relationship.
That thing, and it's properties, is precisely what Hume wrote about.