In telecom though, competition can't just step in. You do realize that the reason the monopoly was allowed was because if everyone started wiring themselves to their neighbors, there would soon lead to wires everywhere.
Its also not in the best interest for there to be multiple cable runners; why have 30 different cables all going the same routes? Seems like a big waste of copper which could be used elsewhere to me.
Of course you are right. So lets get the gov't out of the mix. I'll go gather my neighbors and demand that Verizon pay us for running lines on OUR property. I'm sure other neighboorhoods would love to do this as well.
Because both you and ebay already paid the shipping and handling. You both pay for access to the highway. In this case though, the highway is what actually moves the item in question; in the real world its a truck that moves the item over the roads.
I know one person that actually used WinME. Most everyone I know went from '98 to XP. But WinME was a horrid mistake, I'll grant you that. Of course I think it was only really sold for, what, a year? XP Home was out in '01.
The windows way of installing software is the opposite of "It Just Works" -- people are just used to going through all the hoops that particular installer requires (which is fine, they can keep using what works for them).
If you click on the Parent link for my post, you'll see which post of yours I was responding to. I wasn't chiming in on why Linux software installation sucks, I was refuting your claim that the MS way isn't "It Just Works"
Actually, they don't want to install software, period. A package manager -approach is, in my opinion, closest to that ideal...
The user will always have to install something though, so I don't think the user doesn't want to install software.. it make thier computer useless. And teh MS was is closer to this ideal then a package manager. Usually with windows software, you install the software. Everything else you need is already on the system. With linux, this is rarely true, which is why you need a whole other system to get all the missing pieces (which may not even exist).
The driver can always provide no or a buggy uninstall facility (or none at all.) Microsoft probably won't crack down on this practice.
And as an admin you can always delete the file which the driver is contain in. How exactly is MS supposed to enforce that a vendor produce a proper uninstall program? Oh wait, they can require that all drivers are digitally signed by MS. Hmm..
If a recommended practice is followed, and an "upgrade" breaks it... whose fault is it?
It was never a recommended practice to put a connection pooled connection into the session. The whole point of connection pooling is that you don't have to worry about performance hits from opening and closing because open just pulls an already opened connection, and close simply returns it to the pool. Indeed, other posters have said it was not recommended practice to store a connection in the session to begin with.
Lets put this into perspective: SUN has (or used to have) the "application guarantee". Basically, if your application runs, and can pass several source analysis tools, it SUNs problem if the application breaks after a system upgrade.
Well, good for SUN. Of course they don't seem to be doing too hot anymore, are they?
Of course, developers are used to the Microsoft model (if it breaks, you now have two pieces -- and we have nothing to do with it).
Its pretty easy to keep your code seperate from API calls. Anyone that doesn't do this (regardless of targeting MS or Linux) is a fool.
Apple gives Devs a 3 - 6 month start for stuff like this at WWDC with the new features... why can't MS? I understand this is a huge change.. all the more reason to DOCuMENT it up front!!! Lastly, if security is so important, why are they still mucking about with login changes 6 months before release?! Authenticating to networks is the core of security! cutting out the key providers of enterprise level stuff is just embarassing. All the more reason to look for MS on the way out soon.
Maybe because until recently apple made all thier own hardware?
A VAX is orders of magnitudes more expensive than a PC. The cost savings is substantial.
People won't be switching to Linux due to licensing costs; a good deal of the cost is hardware, and Linux doesn't change that cost at all. Also the free apps don't live up to the non-free ones. Sorry. I've had a linux server since 97, and tried Linux on the deskop from '03 until ealier this year.
I play games, and had to keep windows for that. Not to mention that more and more wierd errors started creeping up in linux. It became a nightmare to install any new application, KDE was getting more flaky, KMail was becoming more and more unreliable, and GNUCash didn't do the things I wanted it to. Not to mention that I got sick of havnig to check a list to see if a printer I wanted to buy would work on it..
I started feeling like I spent more time fighting with the stupid thing then getting it to do what I wanted. So I decided to switch back to XP. Also ended up building a server from SBS 2003 premium.. I wanted more control over the clients from the server and I didn't want to spend my summer researching getting LDAP and Samba playing nicely (my wife's computer was XP only).
It's not "a good thing" when they change how database connection pooling works.
It used to be recommended practice to stick the db connection in the session object at session.start.
Funny, I remember that be recommended practice BEFORE connection pooling. Once you have connection pooling, there's no reason to hang on to a connection. Just open and close away.
Option Pack 4 changed this behaviour. But it didn't show up until the websites you had already deployed started to get "un-reproducable" errors. The unpooled connections hung around for 30 mins after the last request for that session.
Wow, you mean it stuck around until the session expired? Who would have thought that an object stored in session would remain until the session is gone? The unpooled connection stayed around because you didn't close it! Eventually the session expires and it gets cleaned up. Connection pooling was never about keeping a session open and never closing it.. ugh.
Took a while to work that one out, much to the annoyance of my customers, and at my expense "you wrote it, it must be a bug in your code, bug fixes are covered in our agreement". Getting off the MSDN treadmill was glorious.
It was a bug in your code; you weren't closing the connection when you were done with it. Connection pooling meant you didn't need to keep the connection in session. You obviously didn't know what you were doing.
Let's make one thing clear: Installing software from a single repository using a single UI is both simpler and more secure than doing it with a hundred different UIs from a hundred different web sites. The windows way of installing software is the opposite of "It Just Works" -- people are just used to going through all the hoops that particular installer requires (which is fine, they can keep using what works for them).
Um, this is total bull. Very rarely do I need to find anything to install software I bought for Windows; with Linux, I almost always have had to find some obscure RPM or tar file to compile and then hope it works, and then hope that it doesn't have its own unmet dependencies. Not to mention that I don't really feel like having to check list after list to see if I can buy a printer or not. I like linux, but I was never able to get rid of Windows. In the past few years Windows has actually gotten less frustrating and Linux moreso (I was running Mandriva 2005).
Explaining the concept of package management to intelligent non-geeks is not difficult. In fact in my experience people "get it" quite naturally -- they just need to be told about the pros and cons, not just "click here, here and here".
I'm willing to bet most don't care about package management. They just want to install the software and go on.
Its 'perfect' in almost no cases. Why not let parents decide what age their child should be able to do things, and stop picking absurd numbers out of the air.
The fact is that courts every day decide who is fit to stand trial and make their own decisions; you see this in cases where the defendant is a child, or handicapped in some way.
lol, that is one of the dumbest, most blinded statements I've heard in a long time. There probably have been already millions that have changed into "damaged" forms which can't be transmitted. You know what happens to them? They don't get transmitted, which means those forms stop right there. The problem is, the moment a single virus developes that is MORE easilly transferable, it will be able to grow much faster in numbers than any other form of the virus. It's natural selection, the only variables in this case are time and chance. So, if the virus, as a whole, mutates into something else, I hate to say it, but it's not going to get less transferable, it will only become more transferable.
You clearly don't know what you're talking about. You act as if the virus is trying different combinations until it finds the right one to easily infect us. Just because a mutation occured that made it less trasferable does not rule out the possiblity that same mutation will occur again. It will likely remain just as transferable as it does now. Its really really hard for a virus to cross species. And if you look at the people that did manage to catch it, they practiclly live with chickens and other fowl. As soon as they move the birds out of the house, I'm willing to bet that future cases disappear.
The fact is if you look at this and SARS and ebola and killer bees and the host of other things that are going to be super deadly for us, none of them have come to pass. The media eventually realizes that the disease is going no where fast, and move on to something else. I bet by this time next year we'll no longer be hearing about the bird flu at all.
You're clearly very ignorant about virology, so let me educate you: All it takes is for someone with the Avian flu to contract the regular flu at the same time. If they are infected by both flus at the same time, the RNA for the two strains will cross and there can be a simple result of a mostly human strain version of the virus picking up the deadly aspect of the Avian flu.
Care to cite your credintals and source please? Also, could you tell us how likely it is that you would have BOTH versions of the flu at the same time? Seems to me that would be pretty small.
That is where the danger lies. So the fact that humans are getting it at all makes it monumentally dangerous. Will it wipe out the species? Very unlikely. Will it kill hundreds of millions? Any mutation even 1/5 as deadly as this strain will. It could possibly kill more than a billion people. 1 out of every 6 people on the planet gone. How many members of your family would that be? And forget about the impact on peoples lives. The panic, the mourning, the diseases from bodies laying waste all over the world, there's also the economic impact that would have. 1 out of every 6 workers dead. No country, no family, would be untouched by the devastation that would leave behind.
This is all guessing on your part. You're describing scenes from the black death, where 1) we didn't really have much of a clue about germs and viruses and 2) you couldn't quickly rely information about an outbreak and 3) didn't have any procedures in place should an outbreak occur. As always, you'll have the highest incidents in poorer countries, while more wealthy ones should be able to contain everything pretty quickly.
Thousands of people are not going to drop down walking down the street and emergency workers will be removing bodies and disposing of them properly to help contain an outbreak (and they'll be protected in their biosuits too).
All your doing is spreading fear; please, tell me, what happened with SARS, ebola, killer bees and a host of other things that were supposed to bring the destruction you describe? I'll answer; NOTHING.
I bet alot of games use this approach though, so that different clothing can more easily be applied to the model. Suddenly just about every 3d game goes to M because you could mode the clothes away??
This whole thing is silly. If you have to download a 3rd party hack to get the the nude content, I don't see why that should affect the ratings at all. What if the mod added the content, not just unlocked it? Should that affect the rating of the game to?
Why not just add a disclaimer: This game can be modded to include content not covered by this rating.
Slashdot Mirror
Russia didn't implement Marx's system; thats why its call Communism, not Socialism.
Marx hated the soviet uprising.
You are truely ignorant of history.
In telecom though, competition can't just step in. You do realize that the reason the monopoly was allowed was because if everyone started wiring themselves to their neighbors, there would soon lead to wires everywhere.
Its also not in the best interest for there to be multiple cable runners; why have 30 different cables all going the same routes? Seems like a big waste of copper which could be used elsewhere to me.
Communication is in the public good.
Of course you are right. So lets get the gov't out of the mix. I'll go gather my neighbors and demand that Verizon pay us for running lines on OUR property. I'm sure other neighboorhoods would love to do this as well.
Because both you and ebay already paid the shipping and handling. You both pay for access to the highway. In this case though, the highway is what actually moves the item in question; in the real world its a truck that moves the item over the roads.
The best option would be for the gov't to simply seize the lines and let companies offer service over those lines.
I know one person that actually used WinME. Most everyone I know went from '98 to XP. But WinME was a horrid mistake, I'll grant you that. Of course I think it was only really sold for, what, a year? XP Home was out in '01.
Maybe I was responding to this?
The windows way of installing software is the opposite of "It Just Works" -- people are just used to going through all the hoops that particular installer requires (which is fine, they can keep using what works for them).
If you click on the Parent link for my post, you'll see which post of yours I was responding to. I wasn't chiming in on why Linux software installation sucks, I was refuting your claim that the MS way isn't "It Just Works"
Actually, they don't want to install software, period. A package manager -approach is, in my opinion, closest to that ideal...
The user will always have to install something though, so I don't think the user doesn't want to install software.. it make thier computer useless. And teh MS was is closer to this ideal then a package manager. Usually with windows software, you install the software. Everything else you need is already on the system. With linux, this is rarely true, which is why you need a whole other system to get all the missing pieces (which may not even exist).
The driver can always provide no or a buggy uninstall facility (or none at all.) Microsoft probably won't crack down on this practice.
And as an admin you can always delete the file which the driver is contain in. How exactly is MS supposed to enforce that a vendor produce a proper uninstall program? Oh wait, they can require that all drivers are digitally signed by MS. Hmm..
If a recommended practice is followed, and an "upgrade" breaks it... whose fault is it?
It was never a recommended practice to put a connection pooled connection into the session. The whole point of connection pooling is that you don't have to worry about performance hits from opening and closing because open just pulls an already opened connection, and close simply returns it to the pool. Indeed, other posters have said it was not recommended practice to store a connection in the session to begin with.
Lets put this into perspective: SUN has (or used to have) the "application guarantee". Basically, if your application runs, and can pass several source analysis tools, it SUNs problem if the application breaks after a system upgrade.
Well, good for SUN. Of course they don't seem to be doing too hot anymore, are they?
Of course, developers are used to the Microsoft model (if it breaks, you now have two pieces -- and we have nothing to do with it).
Its pretty easy to keep your code seperate from API calls. Anyone that doesn't do this (regardless of targeting MS or Linux) is a fool.
Apple gives Devs a 3 - 6 month start for stuff like this at WWDC with the new features... why can't MS? I understand this is a huge change.. all the more reason to DOCuMENT it up front!!!
Lastly, if security is so important, why are they still mucking about with login changes 6 months before release?! Authenticating to networks is the core of security! cutting out the key providers of enterprise level stuff is just embarassing. All the more reason to look for MS on the way out soon.
Maybe because until recently apple made all thier own hardware?
Wait, are you saying you can be an admin to install this evil driver, but can't possibly become an admin again to remove it?
Wow.. that's a neat trick.
A VAX is orders of magnitudes more expensive than a PC. The cost savings is substantial.
People won't be switching to Linux due to licensing costs; a good deal of the cost is hardware, and Linux doesn't change that cost at all. Also the free apps don't live up to the non-free ones. Sorry. I've had a linux server since 97, and tried Linux on the deskop from '03 until ealier this year.
I play games, and had to keep windows for that. Not to mention that more and more wierd errors started creeping up in linux. It became a nightmare to install any new application, KDE was getting more flaky, KMail was becoming more and more unreliable, and GNUCash didn't do the things I wanted it to. Not to mention that I got sick of havnig to check a list to see if a printer I wanted to buy would work on it..
I started feeling like I spent more time fighting with the stupid thing then getting it to do what I wanted. So I decided to switch back to XP. Also ended up building a server from SBS 2003 premium.. I wanted more control over the clients from the server and I didn't want to spend my summer researching getting LDAP and Samba playing nicely (my wife's computer was XP only).
It's not "a good thing" when they change how database connection pooling works.
It used to be recommended practice to stick the db connection in the session object at session.start.
Funny, I remember that be recommended practice BEFORE connection pooling. Once you have connection pooling, there's no reason to hang on to a connection. Just open and close away.
Option Pack 4 changed this behaviour. But it didn't show up until the websites you had already deployed started to get "un-reproducable" errors. The unpooled connections hung around for 30 mins after the last request for that session.
Wow, you mean it stuck around until the session expired? Who would have thought that an object stored in session would remain until the session is gone? The unpooled connection stayed around because you didn't close it! Eventually the session expires and it gets cleaned up. Connection pooling was never about keeping a session open and never closing it.. ugh.
Took a while to work that one out, much to the annoyance of my customers, and at my expense "you wrote it, it must be a bug in your code, bug fixes are covered in our agreement". Getting off the MSDN treadmill was glorious.
It was a bug in your code; you weren't closing the connection when you were done with it. Connection pooling meant you didn't need to keep the connection in session. You obviously didn't know what you were doing.
I attempted to forward some spam i've been getting, but was denied because my account isn't verified yet.
I signed up over the weekend, but never got a confirmation email. I'd like to use them, but I can't forward emails until I get a conformation.
It sounds like you need a mac. WIndows never "just works". You pretty much have to rebuild it every six months too.
Bull. You obviously haven't used windows since 95..
Let's make one thing clear: Installing software from a single repository using a single UI is both simpler and more secure than doing it with a hundred different UIs from a hundred different web sites. The windows way of installing software is the opposite of "It Just Works" -- people are just used to going through all the hoops that particular installer requires (which is fine, they can keep using what works for them).
Um, this is total bull. Very rarely do I need to find anything to install software I bought for Windows; with Linux, I almost always have had to find some obscure RPM or tar file to compile and then hope it works, and then hope that it doesn't have its own unmet dependencies. Not to mention that I don't really feel like having to check list after list to see if I can buy a printer or not. I like linux, but I was never able to get rid of Windows. In the past few years Windows has actually gotten less frustrating and Linux moreso (I was running Mandriva 2005).
Explaining the concept of package management to intelligent non-geeks is not difficult. In fact in my experience people "get it" quite naturally -- they just need to be told about the pros and cons, not just "click here, here and here".
I'm willing to bet most don't care about package management. They just want to install the software and go on.
They'd be very few parents that would agree to that absurd scenario.
Good job though you just made your end of the argument look ridiculous.
Its 'perfect' in almost no cases. Why not let parents decide what age their child should be able to do things, and stop picking absurd numbers out of the air.
The fact is that courts every day decide who is fit to stand trial and make their own decisions; you see this in cases where the defendant is a child, or handicapped in some way.
lol, that is one of the dumbest, most blinded statements I've heard in a long time. There probably have been already millions that have changed into "damaged" forms which can't be transmitted. You know what happens to them? They don't get transmitted, which means those forms stop right there. The problem is, the moment a single virus developes that is MORE easilly transferable, it will be able to grow much faster in numbers than any other form of the virus. It's natural selection, the only variables in this case are time and chance. So, if the virus, as a whole, mutates into something else, I hate to say it, but it's not going to get less transferable, it will only become more transferable.
You clearly don't know what you're talking about. You act as if the virus is trying different combinations until it finds the right one to easily infect us. Just because a mutation occured that made it less trasferable does not rule out the possiblity that same mutation will occur again. It will likely remain just as transferable as it does now. Its really really hard for a virus to cross species. And if you look at the people that did manage to catch it, they practiclly live with chickens and other fowl. As soon as they move the birds out of the house, I'm willing to bet that future cases disappear.
The fact is if you look at this and SARS and ebola and killer bees and the host of other things that are going to be super deadly for us, none of them have come to pass. The media eventually realizes that the disease is going no where fast, and move on to something else. I bet by this time next year we'll no longer be hearing about the bird flu at all.
You're clearly very ignorant about virology, so let me educate you: All it takes is for someone with the Avian flu to contract the regular flu at the same time. If they are infected by both flus at the same time, the RNA for the two strains will cross and there can be a simple result of a mostly human strain version of the virus picking up the deadly aspect of the Avian flu.
Care to cite your credintals and source please? Also, could you tell us how likely it is that you would have BOTH versions of the flu at the same time? Seems to me that would be pretty small.
That is where the danger lies. So the fact that humans are getting it at all makes it monumentally dangerous. Will it wipe out the species? Very unlikely. Will it kill hundreds of millions? Any mutation even 1/5 as deadly as this strain will. It could possibly kill more than a billion people. 1 out of every 6 people on the planet gone. How many members of your family would that be? And forget about the impact on peoples lives. The panic, the mourning, the diseases from bodies laying waste all over the world, there's also the economic impact that would have. 1 out of every 6 workers dead. No country, no family, would be untouched by the devastation that would leave behind.
This is all guessing on your part. You're describing scenes from the black death, where 1) we didn't really have much of a clue about germs and viruses and 2) you couldn't quickly rely information about an outbreak and 3) didn't have any procedures in place should an outbreak occur. As always, you'll have the highest incidents in poorer countries, while more wealthy ones should be able to contain everything pretty quickly.
Thousands of people are not going to drop down walking down the street and emergency workers will be removing bodies and disposing of them properly to help contain an outbreak (and they'll be protected in their biosuits too).
All your doing is spreading fear; please, tell me, what happened with SARS, ebola, killer bees and a host of other things that were supposed to bring the destruction you describe? I'll answer; NOTHING.
I bet alot of games use this approach though, so that different clothing can more easily be applied to the model. Suddenly just about every 3d game goes to M because you could mode the clothes away??
Well for some reason you can't even say fart on the radio anymore, even though every 3 year old is running around saying it.
Because maybe they want to allow a mod for really skimpy outfits, that a sports bra wouldn't make possible?
My god, its 2006, why is nudity even an issue in media?
This whole thing is silly. If you have to download a 3rd party hack to get the the nude content, I don't see why that should affect the ratings at all. What if the mod added the content, not just unlocked it? Should that affect the rating of the game to?
Why not just add a disclaimer: This game can be modded to include content not covered by this rating.