You're being absurd. You might as well ask me if I do a full hand trace of each byte of compiled machine code. (including the OS)
How would I reasonably check such a thing? Do you expect me to run my primary OS on a virtual machine and compare images before and after updates? That's insane. (and that's only the most reasonable approach to your suggestion)
I have a problem anytime someone loads software on my machine without my permission. I decide what is an acceptable security/privacy risk - no one else. For example, if I give MS permission to update their broken OS, I'm not giving them permission to add security vulnerabilities to my browser. I don't know about this Ubuntu issue, but people are trying to make it sound similar, and I have sympathy (at least for the moment).
Attempting to make people who give things away entirely for free liable for the consequences is a very dangerous path to tread.
Barring malicious intent and conscious negligence, I agree.
Here's a point worth considering, the GPL, BSD, et al do not place any limits on the use of software, only it's distribution. Hence, it can be argued that there exists no usage relationship, only a distribution relationship. If a user gets in trouble for using gratis software, how can they claim a business contract? The other party has already disavowed any claim or contract for the purpose of using said software (and disclaimed damages).
(Obviously doesn't apply to Red Hat, Novel, et al where a monetary relationship and fitness-for-a-given purpose exists)
Interesting idea, though I would recommend HTTPS (pre-shared self signed cert would be sufficient for in-house use). If predictability is the problem you're trying to avoid, you want to skirt the packet sniffers.
By the way, why write to/dev/urandom, and not/dev/random? Doesn't/dev/urandom act as a front for/dev/random except when the entropy pool is empty (at which point it goes pseudo-random). Just curious.
all-electric... car will have a 100-mile range,...
In other words, it will have a 60 mile range when it's fresh off the lot, and a 30 mile range after the first few months.
Let's be honest, this is combining an industry that habitually lies about fuel economy with batter tech (Laptop manufacturers are regarded as always lying about these.).
Anyhow, file systems are not part of the kernel. They're separate binaries that communicate with the kernel (or with FUSE) through a documented API (ie, the vfs).
You've never compiled your own kernel, have you? Yes, some file systems are implemented entirely using FUSE in user space, but key file systems (and a number of misc) are implemented in the kernel. They can optionally be compiled as loadable modules or compiled right into the kernel binary. The article mentions that BTRFS has been accepted into the official kernel tree, implying that it does not rely on FUSE nor run in userspace.
It could have been worse (and no, I haven't read the article yet). Failing an assertion means that they actually wrote an assertion that did it's job. It's impossible to know without reading the code, but this might have been a remote code execution exploit if they hadn't.
Unless this yet-unnamed research group has some actual clout, you're just regurgitating garbage. Did they take this survey in prison? Even if 25% had commited rape (an absolutely ludecrous number), there's no way they would admit to in in a survey.
Go Away AC. We don't want your kind here. (Being a racist troll is a choice, not a skin color)
If you have internet access, then having the same motivation will get you a lot further. You will find free tools for pretty much everything. And maybe the choice will become a lot harder (should I learn PHP or Ruby? Python or C? Java or LISP?)
Access to tools and information is much better, but it still can be very challenging to learn a first language. I don't think it's inappropriate at all for someone to try to introduce a specific language as an introduction to programming. (so long as it's a general purpose language) After you've been around for a while, it's much easier to decide what language you want to learn on its own merits. Until you've actually coded something, you don't even have the knowledge sufficient to pick a language to learn. All you can do is rely on the recommendations of others.
If someone had offered to teach me Lisp or Smalltalk (languages that I've still not touched) I would have taken them up on it in a heartbeat. Such an introduction wouldn't have limited me, but would have introduced me to broad concepts much earlier. In my opinion (and I could be wrong), young programmers who have had their first taste will seek out other languages on their own in due time.
Nice straw man. Riddle me this: how can a programmer be great if he/she doesn't effectively use the tools on hand? (Including the ones in the language, I haven't even reached the libraries or debugger yet...)
I'm not arguing your point. I'm just saying it's irrelevant to the point that I made.
Well, if they're interested, they'll find the way, the language, the tutorials, the inspiration. If they're not interested, leave it. The role of the teacher or the parent is to motivate, encourage and help. Not to dictate how to enjoy your spare time.
Close. The role of the teacher is to facilitate. The student won't necessarily find "the way, the language, the tutorials, [or] the inspiration" on their own. Yes, the desire must theirs, but you underestimate the value of good support. For example, I couldn't start programming until I actually had a computer. From there, the only resource I had to learn from was a short booklet and the BASIC help system (not very helpful). That was all I had access to for years. It didn't stifle my desire (but it easily could have). It definitely slowed me down. If I had had better tools and a teacher, I would have been much, much better off. (You mention that your mother was a programmer at the time. That would have made all the difference.)
To highlight, I had the desire, but I could have used much better tools. That is (or should be) the heart of the original question. What tools should he offer someone with the proper desire?
From my own observations someone with a programmer's mindset can accept strange rules, arcane procedures and symbols and be just fine with them. These are the wand, the pointy hat, the glyphs and the circle; all part of the experience and no matter what language you use you're going to have that. Don't get caught up in the fake argument that one language in particular is better than another, for learning or otherwise.
Mediocre programmers perhaps. Great programmers aren't satisfied until they understand each little nook of their core language, exactly what it means, does, and compiles to. They can accept them while they learn a language, but it's always gnawing at their soul until they understood.
Pft! The tech has been around, there have been companies offering it, and companies using it. That's not the point
Big companies (Microsoft, Amazon, Google) want all computing to be done on their servers. They're arguing benefits, and there's a lot of buzz right now. Cloud computing is hip at the moment. If things stay as they are, I'm fine with that. When large companies seem to believe they can change the face of computing in such a diabolical manner, I listen. I hope I'm wrong.
I can see just fine, thank you very much. It's you who needs his eyes checked.
Seriously. If you're on Slashdot and are halfway knowledgeable (you've already power-cycled the DSL modem, trouble-shot your local network, etc) this is by far the best way to get your DSL service fixed by them. Their first line of operators only know how to read from a script. Their Tier 2 people have an actual clue about what is going on.
And when they say they're running a "line test", in certain locales that can reset local hardware. They may come back saying that they saw no problem, but the issue will mysteriously disappear. Be assured that it will come back, and you'll need to call them again.
Computing will become more utility like. Adapt or die.
Oh, I hope not. That would be terrible. That would be vendor lock-in of the very worst kind. Assuming all vendors agreed on a standard (not foreseeable), none of them would follow it precisely (think HTML/Javascript/CSS). Large vendors would start creating artificial barriers-to-entry. Regulation would crop up to "protect the consumer" -- failing entirely to protect anyone, the bureaucracy would also serve as barrier-to-entry. The big players would have no intensive to do a great job, only a mediocre one.
Things can only get uglier from there. Imagine if certain DNS registrars were offering cloud services. You'd find migrating your data and programs to be terribly difficult. Despite being highly illegal, you could never tell if your programs or data had been leaked for profit. Costs may seem reasonable for a while. Once the above barriers-to-entry start coming up, prices will rise (because they can). We'd never be able to dethrone Intuit (Quickbooks) once people's data live solely on their servers (The data you need to keep for 5+ years in case of an IRS audit). I could go on.
Privacy and reliability are both issues for home and business users. If either the service OR the ISP goes down, you're stuck.
Offsite computing resources make sense for small business web service and backup. They only make a little sense for mid size businesses. They make no sense for large businesses. (And I recommend in-house backup even if it does make sense otherwise.)
Don't tell me that it's the way of the future. If cloud computing strikes, you'll be telling me that life stinks, deal with it. You might not see that yet. Hopefully, you won't need to.
What definition of "cloud computing" are you using? Corporate data-center, or 3rd party (Google, Amazon, etc)? I assure you, you won't be doing onsite visits to those facilities.
Hmm. It seems they've made great strides since I last played with the thing. I really hope Sobby is easier to set up than it used to be. Last time I tried to get anybody to use this with me, they objected to its difficulty in use and poor user interface. I'll need to look into this again. (I don't remember it having syntax highlighting; I'm really glad it does now.)
Also, watch for Google Wave later this year. (Somebody's bound to write a plugin for syntax highlighting.)
No, no, no. It isn't proof of guilt. What it does do though, is shoot his defense arguments in the foot. It should certainly be admissible by the prosecution on the basis of refuting the defense attorney. What this ultimately does, is make the defense start from scratch*, and change the prosecution's position very little.
*(Yes, I know it won't be entirely from scratch, but this will require a major restructuring.)
Slashdot Mirror
That would be a significant breach of trust on their part. What do you think this article is about?
You're being absurd. You might as well ask me if I do a full hand trace of each byte of compiled machine code. (including the OS)
How would I reasonably check such a thing? Do you expect me to run my primary OS on a virtual machine and compare images before and after updates? That's insane. (and that's only the most reasonable approach to your suggestion)
I have a problem anytime someone loads software on my machine without my permission. I decide what is an acceptable security/privacy risk - no one else. For example, if I give MS permission to update their broken OS, I'm not giving them permission to add security vulnerabilities to my browser. I don't know about this Ubuntu issue, but people are trying to make it sound similar, and I have sympathy (at least for the moment).
Attempting to make people who give things away entirely for free liable for the consequences is a very dangerous path to tread.
Barring malicious intent and conscious negligence, I agree.
Here's a point worth considering, the GPL, BSD, et al do not place any limits on the use of software, only it's distribution. Hence, it can be argued that there exists no usage relationship, only a distribution relationship. If a user gets in trouble for using gratis software, how can they claim a business contract? The other party has already disavowed any claim or contract for the purpose of using said software (and disclaimed damages).
(Obviously doesn't apply to Red Hat, Novel, et al where a monetary relationship and fitness-for-a-given purpose exists)
Dang, you're right. Thanks for the post.
Interesting idea, though I would recommend HTTPS (pre-shared self signed cert would be sufficient for in-house use). If predictability is the problem you're trying to avoid, you want to skirt the packet sniffers.
By the way, why write to /dev/urandom, and not /dev/random? Doesn't /dev/urandom act as a front for /dev/random except when the entropy pool is empty (at which point it goes pseudo-random). Just curious.
Speaking of the obvious:
all-electric ... car will have a 100-mile range,...
In other words, it will have a 60 mile range when it's fresh off the lot, and a 30 mile range after the first few months.
Let's be honest, this is combining an industry that habitually lies about fuel economy with batter tech (Laptop manufacturers are regarded as always lying about these.).
No surprise then that there is now a section of the press that writes in Grandma speak
Uh... vast majority?
Anyhow, file systems are not part of the kernel. They're separate binaries that communicate with the kernel (or with FUSE) through a documented API (ie, the vfs).
You've never compiled your own kernel, have you? Yes, some file systems are implemented entirely using FUSE in user space, but key file systems (and a number of misc) are implemented in the kernel. They can optionally be compiled as loadable modules or compiled right into the kernel binary. The article mentions that BTRFS has been accepted into the official kernel tree, implying that it does not rely on FUSE nor run in userspace.
It could have been worse (and no, I haven't read the article yet). Failing an assertion means that they actually wrote an assertion that did it's job. It's impossible to know without reading the code, but this might have been a remote code execution exploit if they hadn't.
Unless this yet-unnamed research group has some actual clout, you're just regurgitating garbage. Did they take this survey in prison? Even if 25% had commited rape (an absolutely ludecrous number), there's no way they would admit to in in a survey.
Go Away AC. We don't want your kind here. (Being a racist troll is a choice, not a skin color)
If you have internet access, then having the same motivation will get you a lot further. You will find free tools for pretty much everything. And maybe the choice will become a lot harder (should I learn PHP or Ruby? Python or C? Java or LISP?)
Access to tools and information is much better, but it still can be very challenging to learn a first language. I don't think it's inappropriate at all for someone to try to introduce a specific language as an introduction to programming. (so long as it's a general purpose language) After you've been around for a while, it's much easier to decide what language you want to learn on its own merits. Until you've actually coded something, you don't even have the knowledge sufficient to pick a language to learn. All you can do is rely on the recommendations of others.
If someone had offered to teach me Lisp or Smalltalk (languages that I've still not touched) I would have taken them up on it in a heartbeat. Such an introduction wouldn't have limited me, but would have introduced me to broad concepts much earlier. In my opinion (and I could be wrong), young programmers who have had their first taste will seek out other languages on their own in due time.
Nice straw man. Riddle me this: how can a programmer be great if he/she doesn't effectively use the tools on hand? (Including the ones in the language, I haven't even reached the libraries or debugger yet...)
I'm not arguing your point. I'm just saying it's irrelevant to the point that I made.
Well, if they're interested, they'll find the way, the language, the tutorials, the inspiration. If they're not interested, leave it. The role of the teacher or the parent is to motivate, encourage and help. Not to dictate how to enjoy your spare time.
Close. The role of the teacher is to facilitate. The student won't necessarily find "the way, the language, the tutorials, [or] the inspiration" on their own. Yes, the desire must theirs, but you underestimate the value of good support. For example, I couldn't start programming until I actually had a computer. From there, the only resource I had to learn from was a short booklet and the BASIC help system (not very helpful). That was all I had access to for years. It didn't stifle my desire (but it easily could have). It definitely slowed me down. If I had had better tools and a teacher, I would have been much, much better off. (You mention that your mother was a programmer at the time. That would have made all the difference.)
To highlight, I had the desire, but I could have used much better tools. That is (or should be) the heart of the original question. What tools should he offer someone with the proper desire?
Good point. Quick feedback is vital. Instant feedback is highly recommended.
(Insert plug for python and its command line interpreter)
From my own observations someone with a programmer's mindset can accept strange rules, arcane procedures and symbols and be just fine with them. These are the wand, the pointy hat, the glyphs and the circle; all part of the experience and no matter what language you use you're going to have that. Don't get caught up in the fake argument that one language in particular is better than another, for learning or otherwise.
Mediocre programmers perhaps. Great programmers aren't satisfied until they understand each little nook of their core language, exactly what it means, does, and compiles to. They can accept them while they learn a language, but it's always gnawing at their soul until they understood.
Pft! The tech has been around, there have been companies offering it, and companies using it. That's not the point
Big companies (Microsoft, Amazon, Google) want all computing to be done on their servers. They're arguing benefits, and there's a lot of buzz right now. Cloud computing is hip at the moment. If things stay as they are, I'm fine with that. When large companies seem to believe they can change the face of computing in such a diabolical manner, I listen. I hope I'm wrong.
I can see just fine, thank you very much. It's you who needs his eyes checked.
"Can I speak to tier 2?"
Seriously. If you're on Slashdot and are halfway knowledgeable (you've already power-cycled the DSL modem, trouble-shot your local network, etc) this is by far the best way to get your DSL service fixed by them. Their first line of operators only know how to read from a script. Their Tier 2 people have an actual clue about what is going on.
And when they say they're running a "line test", in certain locales that can reset local hardware. They may come back saying that they saw no problem, but the issue will mysteriously disappear. Be assured that it will come back, and you'll need to call them again.
and still lets you do pretty advanced stuff like tweak MX records.
Oh... yeah... That's pretty advanced stuff all right...
Please tell me they at least permit you to set up an SPF record. DNESEC? Anything truly advanced?
Things change.
Undeniably.
Computing will become more utility like. Adapt or die.
Oh, I hope not. That would be terrible. That would be vendor lock-in of the very worst kind. Assuming all vendors agreed on a standard (not foreseeable), none of them would follow it precisely (think HTML/Javascript/CSS). Large vendors would start creating artificial barriers-to-entry. Regulation would crop up to "protect the consumer" -- failing entirely to protect anyone, the bureaucracy would also serve as barrier-to-entry. The big players would have no intensive to do a great job, only a mediocre one.
Things can only get uglier from there. Imagine if certain DNS registrars were offering cloud services. You'd find migrating your data and programs to be terribly difficult. Despite being highly illegal, you could never tell if your programs or data had been leaked for profit. Costs may seem reasonable for a while. Once the above barriers-to-entry start coming up, prices will rise (because they can). We'd never be able to dethrone Intuit (Quickbooks) once people's data live solely on their servers (The data you need to keep for 5+ years in case of an IRS audit). I could go on.
Privacy and reliability are both issues for home and business users. If either the service OR the ISP goes down, you're stuck.
Offsite computing resources make sense for small business web service and backup. They only make a little sense for mid size businesses. They make no sense for large businesses.
(And I recommend in-house backup even if it does make sense otherwise.)
Don't tell me that it's the way of the future. If cloud computing strikes, you'll be telling me that life stinks, deal with it. You might not see that yet. Hopefully, you won't need to.
What definition of "cloud computing" are you using? Corporate data-center, or 3rd party (Google, Amazon, etc)? I assure you, you won't be doing onsite visits to those facilities.
Hmm. It seems they've made great strides since I last played with the thing. I really hope Sobby is easier to set up than it used to be. Last time I tried to get anybody to use this with me, they objected to its difficulty in use and poor user interface. I'll need to look into this again. (I don't remember it having syntax highlighting; I'm really glad it does now.)
Also, watch for Google Wave later this year. (Somebody's bound to write a plugin for syntax highlighting.)
Apparently too subtle for an AC. Most of us followed what you said.
No, no, no. It isn't proof of guilt. What it does do though, is shoot his defense arguments in the foot. It should certainly be admissible by the prosecution on the basis of refuting the defense attorney. What this ultimately does, is make the defense start from scratch*, and change the prosecution's position very little.
*(Yes, I know it won't be entirely from scratch, but this will require a major restructuring.)
I'm surprised the Judge hasn't called in both attorneys and chewed them out. They clearly deserve it.