If Mike McConnel is so concerned about cyber security, why did he leave his post 7 days into the Obama administration for a cush job in the private sector?
I understand the theory, but that's all it is, is a theory, based on speculation.
You can't actually test the theory to see how valid or reliable it is.
I could create just as logical of an argument to show why closed-source development produces LESS bugs.
Something about how for-profit development has more formal Q&A processes, and how everyone involved is a paid professional who is accountable to their employer. Or something like that.
I'm all for open source software. I could give you a dozen reasons why it's a great thing.
But does anyone REALLY believe it's bug-free because there are lots of eyeballs on it?
From the first time I heard that argument I thought it was laughable and not backed by any solid evidence.
He's attacking that argument for a simple reason: Because he can. It's a stupid argument.
And he's getting people all worked up and distracted over it.
Meanwhile, in the next room, Microsoft salespeople are convincing your boss they need to switch all your licensing to a yearly subscription model, and that there's no reason why you should actually OWN the software that you're paying all this money for.
"Is hanging out on Slashdot looking to cherry-pick a phrase out of context for the sole purpose of telling someone, anyone, that they are wrong, a lonely life?"
I'll stick with my opinion that the submitter's question was A) A good question, B) Worthy of honest response and discussion, C) Germane to an area that gets less coverage than it deserves.
And that your response added nothing worthy to the discussion.
Really. A guy asks a question for help and all of these people keep telling him 30-40,000 lines of code isn't much.
That's a lot of code to get your arms around if you didn't write it. It's not the end of the world, but it is a sizeable task, and is the type of topic that few professional journals or books will ever be written about.
Having been in similar situations, I my advice would be:
1) Try to get an understanding of the history of the code. Who wrote it? Why? How many developers? How long has it been around? Do people love it or hate it? Is there a version control system in place you can use for information?
2) Look at it from a technical viewpoint. Is is complete? Does it compile and run? How many languages are used? Are there interfaces with other systems you need to know about? What dependancies are there? How easy is it to setup a test server? What parts are well coded? What parts stink up the joint?
3) Dig for functional documentation. What does it do? For whom does it do it? What business needs does it support? How mission critical is it?
4) Meet with the business owners. Seriously. This helps you do two things: #1-- Define the real business need (which may be different than what was understood by the previous developers), and #2-- Set appropriate expectations about maintenance. You'll work hard to maintain and keep it working, but you are working from a disadvantaged position. It is important they know this and support you in your efforts, rather than complain loudly when something doesn't work.
5) Plan to remove the dead weight. There's always a lot of dead weight in these near-abandonded projects. Get an idea how to simplify things and plan your work in phases.
6) Setup real test and development servers. Yeah, you know that wasn't already done.
7) Use version control. But you know this. It's 2010, and no developer worth his/her salt would code a paying project without version control. Right?
8) All fixes will take much longer than if you wrote the code, so be careful with estimating time.
Slashdot Mirror
Sign me up!
It's more effective if you just take a hit from an Oxygen tank.
Why try to jam the O2 into your drink?
Thanks for clarifying this. My understanding of the situation mirrored what you described, but it is nice to hear it from someone first-hand.
How do you see this playing out in, say, 10 years?
Will the communists back away from their firm grasp on the country?
Or will the US end up on a collision course with china?
Or will the US in 10 years have the same limits on freedom they have there?
And, do they still make people carry around those little red books?
Anyone else a little wary of Network Solutions acting as a judge, jury, and executioner?
Is this their role? Should this be their role?
What information do they release regarding their processes and decisions?
Do you trust a corporate entity with such a track record of being difficult to deal with, to interpret the law?
If Mike McConnel is so concerned about cyber security, why did he leave his post 7 days into the Obama administration for a cush job in the private sector?
Is Google a country? Did I miss something?
And exactly what "laws" is Google breaking in China?
Why isn't this ever worth noting?
I saw the interview when in aired.
It was a puff piece, not a solid reference.
Just like the summary.
... Information. Please help clarify and improved this article by adding references.
Anyone else picture this when reading the summary?
"Many sources" "Excitedly report" "Exclusive interview" "eBay. Google. Staples. FedEx. Walmart. CBS."
All marketing hoopla.
"particularly bad job of actually managing the events" is how we do it.
IE, see last summer's racial incident at the hunnington valley swim club when black kids were invited, then banned from the pool.
That is all.
Seriously. You want all the world to abide by an anti-piracy measure and don't include the biggest pirate on the planet?
I understand the theory, but that's all it is, is a theory, based on speculation.
You can't actually test the theory to see how valid or reliable it is.
I could create just as logical of an argument to show why closed-source development produces LESS bugs.
Something about how for-profit development has more formal Q&A processes, and how everyone involved is a paid professional who is accountable to their employer. Or something like that.
But that, too would just be a theory.
I'm all for open source software. I could give you a dozen reasons why it's a great thing.
But does anyone REALLY believe it's bug-free because there are lots of eyeballs on it?
From the first time I heard that argument I thought it was laughable and not backed by any solid evidence.
He's attacking that argument for a simple reason: Because he can. It's a stupid argument.
And he's getting people all worked up and distracted over it.
Meanwhile, in the next room, Microsoft salespeople are convincing your boss they need to switch all your licensing to a yearly subscription model, and that there's no reason why you should actually OWN the software that you're paying all this money for.
Obviouly the iTunes store is McDonalds.
Android is Burger King.
And these clowns are fighting to be Wendy's?
Or are they trying to be those hybrid KFC-Taco Bell-Pizza Hut stores?
Still, it's nice of these broken companies to move themselves to the end of the phone book.
Those seem to be the big areas where MS is falling behind in this race.
Slick interface on a smartphone that syncs to the desktop and has a modern embedded browser? There are plenty of those on the market today.
Two links to the same book doesn't equal two actual book links.
Perhaps rather than using the word "few" I should have calculated whatever small percentage of books are available on the topic.
But then again, I have a life.
No, my next question would be:
"Is hanging out on Slashdot looking to cherry-pick a phrase out of context for the sole purpose of telling someone, anyone, that they are wrong, a lonely life?"
I'll stick with my opinion that the submitter's question was A) A good question, B) Worthy of honest response and discussion, C) Germane to an area that gets less coverage than it deserves.
And that your response added nothing worthy to the discussion.
few (fy)
adj. fewer, fewest
Amounting to or consisting of a small number: one of my few bad habits.
Being more than one but indefinitely small in number: bowled a few strings.
n. (used with a pl. verb)
An indefinitely small number of persons or things: A few of the books have torn jackets.
An exclusive or limited number: the discerning few; the fortunate few.
Really. A guy asks a question for help and all of these people keep telling him 30-40,000 lines of code isn't much.
That's a lot of code to get your arms around if you didn't write it. It's not the end of the world, but it is a sizeable task, and is the type of topic that few professional journals or books will ever be written about.
Having been in similar situations, I my advice would be:
1) Try to get an understanding of the history of the code. Who wrote it? Why? How many developers? How long has it been around? Do people love it or hate it? Is there a version control system in place you can use for information?
2) Look at it from a technical viewpoint. Is is complete? Does it compile and run? How many languages are used? Are there interfaces with other systems you need to know about? What dependancies are there? How easy is it to setup a test server? What parts are well coded? What parts stink up the joint?
3) Dig for functional documentation. What does it do? For whom does it do it? What business needs does it support? How mission critical is it?
4) Meet with the business owners. Seriously. This helps you do two things: #1-- Define the real business need (which may be different than what was understood by the previous developers), and #2-- Set appropriate expectations about maintenance. You'll work hard to maintain and keep it working, but you are working from a disadvantaged position. It is important they know this and support you in your efforts, rather than complain loudly when something doesn't work.
5) Plan to remove the dead weight. There's always a lot of dead weight in these near-abandonded projects. Get an idea how to simplify things and plan your work in phases.
6) Setup real test and development servers. Yeah, you know that wasn't already done.
7) Use version control. But you know this. It's 2010, and no developer worth his/her salt would code a paying project without version control. Right?
8) All fixes will take much longer than if you wrote the code, so be careful with estimating time.
They are never getting that money back. Let's be serious.
Market Cap of Palm is less than 2 billion. It would be cheaper to just buy them for the patents than to litigate.
It's Compuserve GIF all over again.
Too bad "ManInTheWhiteSuit" is too long of a tag.
What a great movie.
Contracts don't have to be written in contract form. This is custom, not law.
And, oral contracts, except in a few forms like real estate, are just as valid as written contracts.