I wrote my own simple debugging class for php. It's only about 90 lines long, and borrowed some ideas from other debugging scripts I had seen various places. It can dump objects, arrays and scalar values, and does so at the bottom of the page. Basically, each object knows how to output it's own data for debugging purposes, and the class just calls a specific method on the object to output the data. It can even email 'critical' events to an administrator, if you run it on 'live' code (which I don't, generally). I've put the class on my website: http://adamsemail.net/nh/debug_class.html.
Call it with Debugger::debug(item,'tag') for each element you want to display (tag must be unique on each page), and then Debuger::output() at the bottom of the page to be debugged.
It's completely free, do what you want with it
Re:Does it tell you how to upgrade PHP?
on
PHP 5 Recipes
·
· Score: 1
Download and build apache and php from source. Remove the RPM versions. Install the newly built ones. Now you are no longer tied to the RPM that RedHat provides. I don't even bother installing RPM's for apache, php, perl, sendmail (and other packages) at this point.
This way, I get to control what version and what patches I run, on my schedule.
You can get the source for php from php.net and the source for apache from apache.org. It's really that easy. Or you can pay an apache/php geek to do the first one for you, then take over yourself.
As a good Christian parent I say fine - don't buy them for your kids. And teach your kids why you don't think they are appropriate. That's what *I* have done with regard to games like GTA: San Andreas. It is absolutely, positively NOT the government's job to determine what my kids can and can't see, read, etc. That's MY job. The First Amandment says they can't pass laws limiting freedom of speech. And I agree. The one exception is providing obscene material to children, and I have no problem with that restriction.
The limits you want to set for YOUR kids are between you, your kids, your church (possibly) and God. Period. I will set the limits for MY children, thank you very much.
Just so we're clear, my church is very conservative, and I'm an ordained minister. But I believe in the First Amemdment and that it's the parents' duty to monitor and control their kids - not the government's.
But this is how it always starts. The cry of We have to protect the children by politicians looking for re-election (and Gov Rod has several investigations into his administration to distract people from right now) leads to LOTS of bad law. And this one is no different. You know the next step - banning sales to kids didn't work, they are still getting their hands on them. So we have to make the law tougher. And the cycle continues.
Fundamentally, the responsibility lies with the parents, not the state, to monitor what their kids do. This goes for all manner of things, not just buying video games. My kids know the rules that we have, and I know they know them. But my rules should not limit what OTHER parents or kids do! This is just another 'nanny-state' law - the kind I'm really getting tired of.
I am reminded of the entire Tipper Gore vs. Frank Zappa music censorship battle. To quote Zappa (from the Joe's Garage liner notes:
Desperate nerds in high offices all over the world have been known to enact the most disgusting pieces of legislation in order to win votes (or in places where they don't get votes, to control unwanted forms of mass behavior).
Environmental laws were not passed to protect our air and water...they were passed to get votes. Seasonal anti-smut campaigns are not conducted to rid our communities of moral rot...they are conducted to give an aura of saintliness to the office-seekers who demand them. If a few key phrases are thrown into any speech (as the expert advisors explain to these various heads of state) votes will roll in, bucks will roll in, and, most importantly, power will be maintained by the groovy guy (or gal) who gets the most media coverage for his sleaze. Naturally, his friends in various businesses will do okay too.
All governments perpetuate themselves through the daily commission of acts which a rational person might find to be stupid or dangerous (or both). Naturally, our government is no exception.
Frank knew what he was talking about! Here's an excerpt from his congressional testimony that speaks volumes
It is my understanding that, in law, First Amendment Issues are decided with a preference for the least restrictive alternative. In this context, the PMRC's demands are the equivalent of treating dandruff by decapitation.
No one has forced Mrs. Baker or Mrs. Gore to bring Prince or Sheena Easton into their homes. Thanks to the Constitution, they are free to buy other forms of music for their children. Apparently, they insist on purchasing the works of contemporary recording artists in order to support a personal illusion of aerobic sophistication. Ladies, please be advised: The $8.98 purchase price does not entitle you to a kiss on the foot from the composer or performer in exchange for a spin on the family Victrola. Taken as a whole, the complete list of PMRC demands reads like an instruction manual for some sinister kind of "toilet training program" to house-break all composers and performers because of the lyrics of a few. Ladies, how dare you?"
Moderated newsgroups therefore do not have any spam, and although it's possible for moderators to abuse their power, I haven't seen this to be the case. Moderating a newsgroup probably takes a lot of time and responsibility.
I moderate a newsgroup with a daily volume of perhaps 40 posts. It really doesn't take a lot of time, since I wrote a php-based web interface which does a lot of scans for off-topic material, spam, etc. I can read and approve those articles in around 10 minutes - many of the posters are 'regulars' and thus don't need tight scrutiny, as they have learned the rules. I've been doing this for about 10 years now. And it's been well worth the time, even when I was doing it all by hand (I then moved to shell scripts, and then to the web interface).
Except that CA is so huge that to market a disc in CA that was different than the rest of the US just wouldn't be worth the cost. Especially since CDs are bought online, etc. No, if CA wins, Sony will end up dropping THIS particular DRM method. And others will be less likely to do something like it.
Also, CA isn't the only state with such consumer protections. Others will follow suit if this one works, or even before.
If you think the machine doesn't work, prove it with a test case.
That's just it. In the US I don't have to do this. The government must prove that it worked properly in this case. Otherwise they have no evidence. (IANL)
Lack of market support will lead to attempts to pass legislation to force adoption. The RIAA (and others) will spare no expense of buying Senators and Representatives in their quest to control all content, always, everywhere. Just doing nothing, unfortunately, won't work.
DirecWay (from DirecTV) offers satellite return service - no phone line necessary. I used it for about 6 months some time ago (when this area was total broadband hell, as opposed to only being partial broadband hell). It does work, but some major caveats:
When it rains hard, forget about using it until the storm passes
When it snows, you have to clear the dish regularly (or use a cover)
Latency is tremendous - basically forget online gaming and VoIP
But, if it's your only option, it's great. Seriously - in the same situation, I'd use it again
Exactly. But to many of these managers who have spent the last 15 or so years in a Microsoft (or even MS/Novell) environment, Linux is black magic - and hiring "long-haired, bearded linux gurus" scares them.
They don't understand the system and are afraid that if something goes terribly wrong, they'll get blamed for chosing 'free' software as opposed to Microsoft. IBM used to play this game a LOT and win big contracts because people were so afraid to try new technologies from other vendors.
No kidding. I work for a company that has something like 10 million emails in our database. Our clients are top-drawer companies that run opt-in lists. One pass through Michigan's database is $70,000K for us. AND since the law says that each sender has to validate their own lists, then our clients much do the same thing, netting MI another $70K. And this on a *monthly* basis. I suspect that our runs alone would pay for the entire database and the employees to run it - $1.7 million per year!
I'm sure and unspoken part of MI's goal is to make it impossible to have large databaes of email addresses, somehow thinking this will stop spammers. It won't.
Oh, this act isn't limited to kids. Per the website, if an adult's email can be viewed by children when they view it or if the share a computer, then the adult can register their email address as well.
In any event, legitimate email providers and companies that use email to communicate with their clietns are going to be in major trouble. This will be fought in court, for sure.
It doesn't require them to RUN those widgets - just have them in the widget dock. Frankly, I don't see this as a major problem, especially given the improved security. The widgets don't run as root, and you can't just install anything without proper administrative access.
The default settings I used on my Mac stopped this cold. First, I have the setting in Safari to not automatically run 'safe' files after download. Thus, it just downloaded, didn't install.
Second, I don't have a personal Widgets folder. I only use the system one, and copy the widgets there with su. So, even after setting the 'run safe' option, it still didn't install!
So, yes, it does affect Macs, but those of us who are completeloy paranoid are pretty safe.
My suggestion - block auto-open of 'safe' downloads AND move all your widgets to the system folder and delete your widgets folder.
While in spirit I agree with you, it appears that the courts believe that shrink-wrap EULA's are enforceable in at least some circumstances.
I've read enough of them to see some pretty outrageous terms, and I'm certain (though I'm not a lawyer) that many of the terms are simply unenforceable. Others are silly. Some actually mean something (ie only installing an OS on one CPU for which it is licensed) and are enforcible.
It's the downright stupid stuff, plus the stuff that gives them way too many rights that don't really belong to them that will get them in trouble. Maybe, just maybe, having to publish the stuff in advance, and allow people to read it in advance will put an end to some of the stupidity.
I wouln't hold my breath, though - major corporations can be pretty dumb at times.:-(
One word: control. The creators want creative control. The bean-counters in the corner office often don't like the creators because they feel they "own" the product and will try to foce their will on the corporation.
It's just easier for the corporation to buy them out and send them on their way, and not deal with those "annoying" creators anymore.
How long before they have to shut off comments or block users en masse because the comments and postings are all negative.
I'm betting that IF they allow user input to be posted it will be heavily censored. It would have to be. SCO has zero friends. That's what happens when you sue your own freakin' customers!
I'm not surprised either. I used a Mac back in 1985, but then ended up on DOS/Windows boxes until about 18 months ago. Having switched and used a Mac for this period of time, I would NEVER switch back to Windows. Heck, I made it a requirement of accepting my last job offer that I have a Mac, not a PC.
Why? Because the Mac gives me the best of both worlds - a Unix box (BSD no less), and a fantastic UI. I've been a Unix guy for a LONG time (1980). Linux is great, but when it comes to Unix-like boxes, I'll take the Mac any day as a user environment.
I've switched my whole family - we now have 4 macs in the house. I got my pastor to switch to the Mac, and when I was a consultant, several comapnies I supported took my advice and switched. EVERYONE is happier than they ever were on the Windows box.
Sure. Censorship is a way of controlling the people. And by limiting what can be said or written, the government controls the exchange of information. When that happens, your liberty is at stake. You have to fight to keep your 1st Amendment rights. If you don't, you'll end up in tyranny.
The "Online" might be wrong, but"rights" are surely involved.
The fact that Stern's show is a major problem for the current nannies in Washington, getting a show on a medium that is subscription only is a big deal. Does it affect my rights? Sure does. My right to listen to what I want to listen to, without government censorship. I don't like Howard Stern, but I like the idea of the government controlling what he can and can't say on the radio a lot less.
The current rush by the government to "protect us" is just another link in the chain of despotism.
Modded funny, but you just watch - people WILL blame the government when it happens. No matter how much you try to explain, no matter how clear the explainations are, a significant number of people are going to blame the government.
It's also the case that whoever is in office is going to get burned by the problems - blamed for "lack of preparedness" or "failure to respond to the situation" etc, etc. And there will be calls for huge governmennt expenditures to "fix" or "solve" the problem.
I've heard all kinds of "it's too complicated" objections to this. But I convinced our pastor to run our parish council elections according to this method, and it was a breeze to explain it to everyone, AND the results reflected the goal - the candidate that was most acceptable to the most people won.
As someone who has voted for "third parties" in every presidential election since 1988, I would welcome a system like this.
In the end, access to any system is granted (or not) by the owner of the system. When you sign up for Internet service, the only thing you are guaranteed is a connection to the ISP's own systems. Anything beyond that is up the the owner of the system you are trying to communicate with. If the admin of that sytstem doesn't want email from you, or doesn't want you accessing his web site, that's his perogative.
What people seem to forget is that the internet is, for the most part, a collection of private systems which are interconnected. And people should be able to do what they want with their private property.
Slashdot Mirror
I wrote my own simple debugging class for php. It's only about 90 lines long, and borrowed some ideas from other debugging scripts I had seen various places. It can dump objects, arrays and scalar values, and does so at the bottom of the page. Basically, each object knows how to output it's own data for debugging purposes, and the class just calls a specific method on the object to output the data. It can even email 'critical' events to an administrator, if you run it on 'live' code (which I don't, generally). I've put the class on my website: http://adamsemail.net/nh/debug_class.html.
Call it with Debugger::debug(item,'tag') for each element you want to display (tag must be unique on each page), and then Debuger::output() at the bottom of the page to be debugged.
It's completely free, do what you want with it
Download and build apache and php from source. Remove the RPM versions. Install the newly built ones. Now you are no longer tied to the RPM that RedHat provides. I don't even bother installing RPM's for apache, php, perl, sendmail (and other packages) at this point.
This way, I get to control what version and what patches I run, on my schedule.
You can get the source for php from php.net and the source for apache from apache.org. It's really that easy. Or you can pay an apache/php geek to do the first one for you, then take over yourself.
As a good Christian parent I say fine - don't buy them for your kids. And teach your kids why you don't think they are appropriate. That's what *I* have done with regard to games like GTA: San Andreas. It is absolutely, positively NOT the government's job to determine what my kids can and can't see, read, etc. That's MY job. The First Amandment says they can't pass laws limiting freedom of speech. And I agree. The one exception is providing obscene material to children, and I have no problem with that restriction.
The limits you want to set for YOUR kids are between you, your kids, your church (possibly) and God. Period. I will set the limits for MY children, thank you very much.
Just so we're clear, my church is very conservative, and I'm an ordained minister. But I believe in the First Amemdment and that it's the parents' duty to monitor and control their kids - not the government's.
But this is how it always starts. The cry of We have to protect the children by politicians looking for re-election (and Gov Rod has several investigations into his administration to distract people from right now) leads to LOTS of bad law. And this one is no different. You know the next step - banning sales to kids didn't work, they are still getting their hands on them. So we have to make the law tougher. And the cycle continues.
Fundamentally, the responsibility lies with the parents, not the state, to monitor what their kids do. This goes for all manner of things, not just buying video games. My kids know the rules that we have, and I know they know them. But my rules should not limit what OTHER parents or kids do! This is just another 'nanny-state' law - the kind I'm really getting tired of.
I am reminded of the entire Tipper Gore vs. Frank Zappa music censorship battle. To quote Zappa (from the Joe's Garage liner notes:
Frank knew what he was talking about! Here's an excerpt from his congressional testimony that speaks volumes
To bad Zappa died of cancer in 1993.
Moderated newsgroups therefore do not have any spam, and although it's possible for moderators to abuse their power, I haven't seen this to be the case. Moderating a newsgroup probably takes a lot of time and responsibility.
I moderate a newsgroup with a daily volume of perhaps 40 posts. It really doesn't take a lot of time, since I wrote a php-based web interface which does a lot of scans for off-topic material, spam, etc. I can read and approve those articles in around 10 minutes - many of the posters are 'regulars' and thus don't need tight scrutiny, as they have learned the rules. I've been doing this for about 10 years now. And it's been well worth the time, even when I was doing it all by hand (I then moved to shell scripts, and then to the web interface).
and just in California
Except that CA is so huge that to market a disc in CA that was different than the rest of the US just wouldn't be worth the cost. Especially since CDs are bought online, etc. No, if CA wins, Sony will end up dropping THIS particular DRM method. And others will be less likely to do something like it.
Also, CA isn't the only state with such consumer protections. Others will follow suit if this one works, or even before.
I think that Apple may be using this to show that the MPAA can make some real money on selling videos from iTunes.
And the MPAA will, like the RIAA before it, along with the content providers, begin demanding larger and larger cuts and higher and higher prices.
They can't imagine a world where they can't rape the consumer.
If you think the machine doesn't work, prove it with a test case.
That's just it. In the US I don't have to do this. The government must prove that it worked properly in this case. Otherwise they have no evidence. (IANL)
Lack of market support will lead to attempts to pass legislation to force adoption. The RIAA (and others) will spare no expense of buying Senators and Representatives in their quest to control all content, always, everywhere. Just doing nothing, unfortunately, won't work.
DirecWay (from DirecTV) offers satellite return service - no phone line necessary. I used it for about 6 months some time ago (when this area was total broadband hell, as opposed to only being partial broadband hell). It does work, but some major caveats:
But, if it's your only option, it's great. Seriously - in the same situation, I'd use it again
Exactly. But to many of these managers who have spent the last 15 or so years in a Microsoft (or even MS/Novell) environment, Linux is black magic - and hiring "long-haired, bearded linux gurus" scares them.
They don't understand the system and are afraid that if something goes terribly wrong, they'll get blamed for chosing 'free' software as opposed to Microsoft. IBM used to play this game a LOT and win big contracts because people were so afraid to try new technologies from other vendors.
No kidding. I work for a company that has something like 10 million emails in our database. Our clients are top-drawer companies that run opt-in lists. One pass through Michigan's database is $70,000K for us. AND since the law says that each sender has to validate their own lists, then our clients much do the same thing, netting MI another $70K. And this on a *monthly* basis. I suspect that our runs alone would pay for the entire database and the employees to run it - $1.7 million per year!
I'm sure and unspoken part of MI's goal is to make it impossible to have large databaes of email addresses, somehow thinking this will stop spammers. It won't.
Oh, this act isn't limited to kids. Per the website, if an adult's email can be viewed by children when they view it or if the share a computer, then the adult can register their email address as well.
In any event, legitimate email providers and companies that use email to communicate with their clietns are going to be in major trouble. This will be fought in court, for sure.
It's a single user system (my laptop).
It doesn't require them to RUN those widgets - just have them in the widget dock. Frankly, I don't see this as a major problem, especially given the improved security. The widgets don't run as root, and you can't just install anything without proper administrative access.
The default settings I used on my Mac stopped this cold. First, I have the setting in Safari to not automatically run 'safe' files after download. Thus, it just downloaded, didn't install.
Second, I don't have a personal Widgets folder. I only use the system one, and copy the widgets there with su. So, even after setting the 'run safe' option, it still didn't install!
So, yes, it does affect Macs, but those of us who are completeloy paranoid are pretty safe.
My suggestion - block auto-open of 'safe' downloads AND move all your widgets to the system folder and delete your widgets folder.
While in spirit I agree with you, it appears that the courts believe that shrink-wrap EULA's are enforceable in at least some circumstances.
I've read enough of them to see some pretty outrageous terms, and I'm certain (though I'm not a lawyer) that many of the terms are simply unenforceable. Others are silly. Some actually mean something (ie only installing an OS on one CPU for which it is licensed) and are enforcible.
It's the downright stupid stuff, plus the stuff that gives them way too many rights that don't really belong to them that will get them in trouble. Maybe, just maybe, having to publish the stuff in advance, and allow people to read it in advance will put an end to some of the stupidity.
I wouln't hold my breath, though - major corporations can be pretty dumb at times. :-(
Heh. I bet more people get it than the OP thinks. :-)
One word: control. The creators want creative control. The bean-counters in the corner office often don't like the creators because they feel they "own" the product and will try to foce their will on the corporation.
It's just easier for the corporation to buy them out and send them on their way, and not deal with those "annoying" creators anymore.
How long before they have to shut off comments or block users en masse because the comments and postings are all negative.
I'm betting that IF they allow user input to be posted it will be heavily censored. It would have to be. SCO has zero friends. That's what happens when you sue your own freakin' customers!
I'm not surprised either. I used a Mac back in 1985, but then ended up on DOS/Windows boxes until about 18 months ago. Having switched and used a Mac for this period of time, I would NEVER switch back to Windows. Heck, I made it a requirement of accepting my last job offer that I have a Mac, not a PC.
Why? Because the Mac gives me the best of both worlds - a Unix box (BSD no less), and a fantastic UI. I've been a Unix guy for a LONG time (1980). Linux is great, but when it comes to Unix-like boxes, I'll take the Mac any day as a user environment.
I've switched my whole family - we now have 4 macs in the house. I got my pastor to switch to the Mac, and when I was a consultant, several comapnies I supported took my advice and switched. EVERYONE is happier than they ever were on the Windows box.
Sure. Censorship is a way of controlling the people. And by limiting what can be said or written, the government controls the exchange of information. When that happens, your liberty is at stake. You have to fight to keep your 1st Amendment rights. If you don't, you'll end up in tyranny.
The "Online" might be wrong, but"rights" are surely involved.
The fact that Stern's show is a major problem for the current nannies in Washington, getting a show on a medium that is subscription only is a big deal. Does it affect my rights? Sure does. My right to listen to what I want to listen to, without government censorship. I don't like Howard Stern, but I like the idea of the government controlling what he can and can't say on the radio a lot less.
The current rush by the government to "protect us" is just another link in the chain of despotism.
Hatch is a Senator. This is a House Bill
The lone holdout was Rep. Ron Paul, a libertarian-leaning Republican Congressman from Texas.
Modded funny, but you just watch - people WILL blame the government when it happens. No matter how much you try to explain, no matter how clear the explainations are, a significant number of people are going to blame the government.
It's also the case that whoever is in office is going to get burned by the problems - blamed for "lack of preparedness" or "failure to respond to the situation" etc, etc. And there will be calls for huge governmennt expenditures to "fix" or "solve" the problem.
I've heard all kinds of "it's too complicated" objections to this. But I convinced our pastor to run our parish council elections according to this method, and it was a breeze to explain it to everyone, AND the results reflected the goal - the candidate that was most acceptable to the most people won.
As someone who has voted for "third parties" in every presidential election since 1988, I would welcome a system like this.
In the end, access to any system is granted (or not) by the owner of the system. When you sign up for Internet service, the only thing you are guaranteed is a connection to the ISP's own systems. Anything beyond that is up the the owner of the system you are trying to communicate with. If the admin of that sytstem doesn't want email from you, or doesn't want you accessing his web site, that's his perogative.
What people seem to forget is that the internet is, for the most part, a collection of private systems which are interconnected. And people should be able to do what they want with their private property.