I regret only the absence of a one page quick ref (all field selectors, logical opperators)... presented like grammare available from the front page of any search engine. It is so quicker to type in a nice query as opposed to complete cryptic advanced search forms.
Would be nice so have a standard SE-SQL. I mean a SearEngineSimpleQueryLanguage all the same accross search engines. Would be no need to RTFM.
Where I come from. I reworked a 5000 loc and created a 4500 loc Perl frameworks. Are handling nigthly prod and running C/S product demos. Both targeting 10 UNIX & 4 Win flavours. Used and customized a CPAN module. Developed a.pm. This only say I used some Perl.
I have to say if you don't force yourself into writting something human readable, one aspect of perl which makes it realy hard is how criptic it can go. If you think quick and dirty, well you can be. Free to chose. But, hell, the man after you, will sweat!
Small change can force coder to write as opposed to spit code. That's good. I thank the man who told me use strict! Makes life so easier. That is what surprise me: too easily no effort are put into "writing" script. The attitude is somehow anyway that's script, who cares ? Funny: Whether I fry an egg or I invent wine mousse for chocolate fondant cake: I want them both good.
Well sounds silly, but for slurping or processings logs and outputs perl is pretty good. (yes it was designed for this). On a Java project, I used some RE lib... So extremly heavy! Need a specific module, I don't even remember now all the heck involved for one simple match/replace. Oh yes, you create a... perl-like reg-exp engine.
Don't know python. Friend of mine told me it's less criptic.
I don't really care the language I use, given it's not propritary, given it makes life easy. I'd agree on the use the good tool statement. By the way, the interesting bit is what we do with a tool, not the tool itself.
That is where I diverge from the article. Interesting job is defintely things in which we learn new stuff, discover more. But for example, yes it's a challenge to provide 1Gb storage per user on a free mail system. So it can be interesting technically to invent. But come on, the aim is plain stupid: 1Gb email ! Means you can delete 90% right now with no loss. It's satisfying the moto have more, when we'r already obese! That's just an example. Challenge and learning is not enough for a good job. Good aim is wanted.
I DO think automatic, "valid" updates can be considered as viruses in the effect they may have. They can actually halt a production system. This is real life experience: I have seen network emulation updates, source code sontrol systems updates fucking up production. More than once. No kidding: even anti-viruses updates broke the prod for some dlls incompatible with XYZ. Isn't it a nightmare? The anti-virus stuff becomes a virus!
The point is, in production you are assumed to know what's on your box. Anything automatic that you can not 100% predict, is braking this statement. You don't know any more. And the point of the automatic update stuff is "you don't want to care" and it is legitimate.
So my point: yes a trojan, no matter how it modifies a system, has a chance of fucking it up. Non acceptable.
Why?
How is this project any more interesting or useful than a confluence of any other human-specified arbitrary classification, e.g. visiting every peak who altitude in cubits is a prime number?
How is [any human-specified arbitrary classification, e.g. visiting every peak who altitude in cubits is a prime number] any more interesting or useful than [this project]?
Is Slashdot really the proper forum for this posting?
You don't like plant singing at you ? I feel it's a pretty poetic invention. Makes me smile. Makes the omelete finely. Immagine you garden filed with strawberies plant, slowly growing year after year, expending the music. Or an aple tree growing into your nasty neighboor garden. And then play Simple Pleasure of Boby Mc Ferrin at him. OoooO yeeea!
The famous "cat lands on his feet" knowlege is to be completed with "and gets damaged like most of heavy things ( > 200g ?) falling from high enough"
Why the cat lands on his feet? No need to answer. It's in the thred.
Why a cat falling from higher altitude may get less injuries, than from a lower altitude? That is the interesting bit. It seams the cat has the ability to feel whether it's falling speed is augmenting. So... until this speed is stabilised, due to air resistence, the cat is stressed 1) by the fall 2) by the constant acceleration. In that case it looks like the animal is more tensed. It's muscles are streched hard. And when the hit comes, the animal's body absorbes badly the smash.
Higher, and less injuiries. Well indeed. When the speed stabilise, the animal is less scared and, reportedly, is less stretching muscles. The hit is better absobed by it's body.But no illusion, it still feekin hurt, with usual broken bones, and blod loss. So no playing lads.
This comment is just to be moded at 6 exceptionaly.
So seldom is the question asked "Why are doing what we do ? Does it make sens?"
This comment is a glory for it's author.
(Just a little too rude)
About Dune... here we go. Not long before comics leads to major things. I am not surprised for, as you have read, I mentionned SF.
But we would be mistaken to look at good comics only through good scenarios. Graphicaly some are breathtaking. I think about Peters and Schuiten for example. We are fare fare away from Marvel stuff or (closer to me) Tintin, which I like but lakes identity. An other example, Druillet (in Delirius) has a amazing style.
An other aspect struck me. Many/. posts mentions about magazines, issues... Basicaly, this makes comics look like a consumable. Could that be an important difference with Europe ? I mean, I have never ever read comics in magazines or serries, like you read news paper.
Though, a good bit of the success of comics in France is, I have to admit, due to some now famous periodicals like "Pilote". But in it's time, this magazine had to strugle hard to be recognised, and there was no way a single author could have made his way on it's own. So... I must be too young to have known these times.
...perfectly suited to our dumbed-down culture and collective attention deficit...
Well... It all really depends on where you are reading comics. Am leaving in Ireland now. And here, it's impossible to get people to realize that comics is not just for kids, silly simple minded stuff. To be honest I failed systematicaly in trying to explain that. I am actually from France. In that place the main stream of comic sale is targeted to adults. Not always light easy-goi'n stuff, meaningless, efortless.
I strongly disagry with this idea it's necessarily easy. One example only. Read the Meta-Baron caste by Jorodovski and Jimenez. Read especially the out-of-serie issue of this saga. You will notice that comic scenario can be quite complex, deeply rooted into theories (psycho-analysis, social...). The drawings are nothiong fare from art. Read about the way Jimenez things about front pages as paintings before starting. The inspiration he got from samurai times, mixed with soap-opera style... I discovered in amsterdam he draws the nun after Brugel. I think it's quite interesting.
No. Sorry, no, comics can be rather demanding in understanding. About previous example, I'd say you probably need a 3 reads before you kind a get an overall picture. And this is just one example. Right now I think about others comics dealing with human being identity, genetics, cloning... I can't help thinking for some BD's (comics in french), as pieces of art, with the same insight that SF can have.
A bit the same way information is turned into something ridiculous on TV, comics can be as well. It's just up to us no to make crap out'a good things. Likely as well, if you'r brain-dead with not an inch of background stuff, you won't even see the richness, the references...
I don't know why in france, comics are considered as adult material as valid as any other books can be.
Maybe the article author is dumbed-down? Or else he's making a paper on sales, which is pretty irrelevent to what comics are.
When one buy a simple window, one knows the risk. When one buy a stronger window, one has less risk. When one pays for an upgrade on a window, one dosn't have to pay for the same upgrade every so often after.
Did you notice how those statements do not work for the product IE. It seams no matter how many upgrade you go for, the day after: same appocalipse. It seams no matter how much you know about it: the day after your sent back to play ground questions: "Is there still any window?"
In other words: It's like one paying to have a window replaced by a brick wall. And the day after the wall is by magic turned back into a window.
I don't care which window I use. I just don't accepte obscurantisme.
You know the reason I don't use IE ? It's because often when I hit the button "stop", it dosen't ! Really. Like you close the window, and lock it, but magic-magic, it's open when you look at it 5 minutes later. It baffles me.
In the symantec article (I could access it) it is suggested : "Turn off and remove unneeded services." I can't help laugh. Buy a blue-tooth enabled mobile phone, and turn off blue tooth stuff as soon as you have it out of the box... Or pay to have something removing the stuff you paid to get.
Hum... may I suggest not ot get such a mobile phone ?
By the way, turning off what I don't need, is something I do with my car, my house, my computer... That is why I have no viruses, no slow down, no whatever I don't want. It's a kind of brake-through: don't use what what you don't need, you'll have less problemes. Ho peoples, I am in great shape today !
A good few years now I am avoiding IE. But I have trouble justifying it, because I don't follow the weekly noise around IE. We know it is a risky and costly business to use IE in a prod environment. It has been demonstrated over and over. Because it's user-friendly-first, which is good, it is dangerouse. It's a known problem.
So I don't follow IE epics. I do my job. And I don't know how to convince people to just be safe, not even don't use IE, but just don't use proven dangerous stuff. What can I do ?
I'd say you are hitting the bottom line of the problem. As mentioned in many posts, prices for CD are just too high. Maybe because price covers not only infrastructure and work, but also the traditional eco ~=+15% bonanza to investors. This +15% in plainly *not reasonable*. This is greed.
Those lads prefer loosing sells by keeping prices up *and* loosing money in pointless copy-protection inventions *and* loosing money in endless law suite... Let's be realistic any soft-protection is by nature doomed.
But now, we have online tune websites. Selling at ~=1.5 EUR the item. I wonder what to do: cry or laugh? Problem is not the media but the price. I obviously will not buy more tune on such a web site: it is TOO expensive.
Once again, labels prefer wasting fortunes on new media/law/systems instead of putting the price to DESCENT values. An investor doing no work doesn't deserve any compensation. OK, yes he does but certainly not this incredible 15%.
I got a story saying it could be cheaper to order in Asia a European CD, produced in Europe. As opposed to buying the same CD in Europe. Isn't it the proof that prices are actually outrageously high ?
Anyone doing a web/press review will find many articles claiming internet/CD copies are damaging CD sells as well as it's contrary. What to believe ? Experience shows it is better to really listen to something before buying. Therefore internet free duplication actually could be raising the sells. Just do a search now on "CD piracy music article press", I ended on WP article "Study: File-Sharing No Threat to Music Sales" as top list finding. Funny isn't it ? I got look on french news, pretty much the same kind of results.
Isn't it this fight against piracy fake ? Real problem could be greede investors not accepting only descent revenue ?
Zijus -- I've never ever downloaded any piece of music over the internet. Believe it ?
My experience was in an environment where we had to maintain many UNIX's and NT's platform in order to certify product on all.
When one have an "old" NT box for example, all auto-update functionnality can be considered as somehow viruses : without warning it will change your environment. I faced several time our source code control system beeing screwed by those auto-updates, because some common stuff is changed in an incompatible way. The culprit was the... antivirus system. Result : production stoped, manual inevestigation... When you have all you prod automated from compile to package including tests, that's kind of pretty bad effect caused by something pretending to protect you.
When we look at the end of the day: the ressource is hijacked for non essential activities, not even in reaction to a real problem. That is why I eventually consider many "protections" as mal-ware.
Could spybot auto-update be considered like that ?
I am pretty reluctant in anything changing a machine "automaticaly", even more users installing rubbish on a box.
I prefer to see myself what is there with www.windowsstartup.com. Hum sure : this does not work if you have to maintain 10s of boxes.
Probably the best solution is do not use an OS so subject to downgrades, just do not even have the possibility of a problem.
Ciao ciao.
The easiest pollution to clean is the one not generated.
Instead of a deposit, which we read it can be easily perverted, how about that :
By default I, the user, do not accept any email.
You want to email me ?
So text me first with the address you are gonna use and convice me it's interesting. Then I will enable this address, and you'll email me as much as you from now on.
OK. Sounds heavy for me the user and for sender. Well, isn't it what we need, something heavier ?
Now, we could imagine something much more automated and simpler. The sender text (paying the price) and, this automaticaly enable texted email address. Would be transparent for me, the recipient. This service could be optional for me. And all ran at server level. (Certainly not on my box.)
This way
- I the recipient, am sure I don't receive anything unwanted
- I, the sender, am ok to pay the price of a text for 200/300 addresses
- I, the spammer, am screwed.
How about mailing lists ? Well, the old proactive systems works fine. I can subscribe to a list deliberatly. Then list address would be accepted. An already subscribed spammer can be removed. And this spammer would have to repay a text with an other email address.
Alltogether, this would keep the openness of SMTP for whoever wants. The payment question would be handled through well tested phone&text system. ( Hum... txt is fare from being generalized. That's a big hick up. ) The sapmmer would be slowed down.
A flaw ?
This could be perverted by back door system. A box is infected with stuff not only sending mail automaticaly but also automaticaly texting ? And back to starting point... Ooohh sh..ugar!
Slashdot Mirror
I regret only the absence of a one page quick ref (all field selectors, logical opperators)... presented like grammare available from the front page of any search engine. It is so quicker to type in a nice query as opposed to complete cryptic advanced search forms.
Would be nice so have a standard SE-SQL. I mean a SearEngineSimpleQueryLanguage all the same accross search engines. Would be no need to RTFM.
Just a few comments on Perl.
Where I come from. I reworked a 5000 loc and created a 4500 loc Perl frameworks. Are handling nigthly prod and running C/S product demos. Both targeting 10 UNIX & 4 Win flavours. Used and customized a CPAN module. Developed a .pm. This only say I used some Perl.
I have to say if you don't force yourself into writting something human readable, one aspect of perl which makes it realy hard is how criptic it can go. If you think quick and dirty, well you can be. Free to chose. But, hell, the man after you, will sweat!
Small change can force coder to write as opposed to spit code. That's good. I thank the man who told me use strict! Makes life so easier. That is what surprise me: too easily no effort are put into "writing" script. The attitude is somehow anyway that's script, who cares ? Funny: Whether I fry an egg or I invent wine mousse for chocolate fondant cake: I want them both good.
Well sounds silly, but for slurping or processings logs and outputs perl is pretty good. (yes it was designed for this). On a Java project, I used some RE lib... So extremly heavy! Need a specific module, I don't even remember now all the heck involved for one simple match/replace. Oh yes, you create a... perl-like reg-exp engine.
Don't know python. Friend of mine told me it's less criptic.
I don't really care the language I use, given it's not propritary, given it makes life easy. I'd agree on the use the good tool statement. By the way, the interesting bit is what we do with a tool, not the tool itself.
That is where I diverge from the article. Interesting job is defintely things in which we learn new stuff, discover more. But for example, yes it's a challenge to provide 1Gb storage per user on a free mail system. So it can be interesting technically to invent. But come on, the aim is plain stupid: 1Gb email ! Means you can delete 90% right now with no loss. It's satisfying the moto have more, when we'r already obese! That's just an example. Challenge and learning is not enough for a good job. Good aim is wanted.
Ciao ciao
I DO think automatic, "valid" updates can be considered as viruses in the effect they may have. They can actually halt a production system. This is real life experience: I have seen network emulation updates, source code sontrol systems updates fucking up production. More than once. No kidding: even anti-viruses updates broke the prod for some dlls incompatible with XYZ. Isn't it a nightmare? The anti-virus stuff becomes a virus!
The point is, in production you are assumed to know what's on your box. Anything automatic that you can not 100% predict, is braking this statement. You don't know any more. And the point of the automatic update stuff is "you don't want to care" and it is legitimate.
So my point: yes a trojan, no matter how it modifies a system, has a chance of fucking it up. Non acceptable.
Ciao ciao.Why? How is this project any more interesting or useful than a confluence of any other human-specified arbitrary classification, e.g. visiting every peak who altitude in cubits is a prime number?
How is [any human-specified arbitrary classification, e.g. visiting every peak who altitude in cubits is a prime number] any more interesting or useful than [this project]?
Am afraid that comment was void. :-)
Is Slashdot really the proper forum for this posting?
You don't like plant singing at you ? I feel it's a pretty poetic invention. Makes me smile. Makes the omelete finely. Immagine you garden filed with strawberies plant, slowly growing year after year, expending the music. Or an aple tree growing into your nasty neighboor garden. And then play Simple Pleasure of Boby Mc Ferrin at him. OoooO yeeea!
The famous "cat lands on his feet" knowlege is to be completed with "and gets damaged like most of heavy things ( > 200g ?) falling from high enough"
Why the cat lands on his feet? No need to answer. It's in the thred.
Why a cat falling from higher altitude may get less injuries, than from a lower altitude? That is the interesting bit. It seams the cat has the ability to feel whether it's falling speed is augmenting. So... until this speed is stabilised, due to air resistence, the cat is stressed 1) by the fall 2) by the constant acceleration. In that case it looks like the animal is more tensed. It's muscles are streched hard. And when the hit comes, the animal's body absorbes badly the smash.
Higher, and less injuiries. Well indeed. When the speed stabilise, the animal is less scared and, reportedly, is less stretching muscles. The hit is better absobed by it's body.But no illusion, it still feekin hurt, with usual broken bones, and blod loss. So no playing lads.
Ciao.IMNSHO ??
This comment is just to be moded at 6 exceptionaly. So seldom is the question asked "Why are doing what we do ? Does it make sens?" This comment is a glory for it's author. (Just a little too rude)
I didn't know Jodorowski makes movie as well.
About Dune... here we go. Not long before comics leads to major things. I am not surprised for, as you have read, I mentionned SF.
But we would be mistaken to look at good comics only through good scenarios. Graphicaly some are breathtaking. I think about Peters and Schuiten for example. We are fare fare away from Marvel stuff or (closer to me) Tintin, which I like but lakes identity. An other example, Druillet (in Delirius) has a amazing style.
An other aspect struck me. Many /. posts mentions about magazines, issues... Basicaly, this makes comics look like a consumable. Could that be an important difference with Europe ? I mean, I have never ever read comics in magazines or serries, like you read news paper.
Though, a good bit of the success of comics in France is, I have to admit, due to some now famous periodicals like "Pilote". But in it's time, this magazine had to strugle hard to be recognised, and there was no way a single author could have made his way on it's own. So... I must be too young to have known these times.
Well... It all really depends on where you are reading comics. Am leaving in Ireland now. And here, it's impossible to get people to realize that comics is not just for kids, silly simple minded stuff. To be honest I failed systematicaly in trying to explain that. I am actually from France. In that place the main stream of comic sale is targeted to adults. Not always light easy-goi'n stuff, meaningless, efortless.
I strongly disagry with this idea it's necessarily easy. One example only. Read the Meta-Baron caste by Jorodovski and Jimenez. Read especially the out-of-serie issue of this saga. You will notice that comic scenario can be quite complex, deeply rooted into theories (psycho-analysis, social...). The drawings are nothiong fare from art. Read about the way Jimenez things about front pages as paintings before starting. The inspiration he got from samurai times, mixed with soap-opera style... I discovered in amsterdam he draws the nun after Brugel. I think it's quite interesting.
No. Sorry, no, comics can be rather demanding in understanding. About previous example, I'd say you probably need a 3 reads before you kind a get an overall picture. And this is just one example. Right now I think about others comics dealing with human being identity, genetics, cloning... I can't help thinking for some BD's (comics in french), as pieces of art, with the same insight that SF can have.
A bit the same way information is turned into something ridiculous on TV, comics can be as well. It's just up to us no to make crap out'a good things. Likely as well, if you'r brain-dead with not an inch of background stuff, you won't even see the richness, the references...
I don't know why in france, comics are considered as adult material as valid as any other books can be.
Maybe the article author is dumbed-down? Or else he's making a paper on sales, which is pretty irrelevent to what comics are.
Ciao ciao.
When one buy a simple window, one knows the risk.
When one buy a stronger window, one has less risk.
When one pays for an upgrade on a window, one dosn't have to pay for the same upgrade every so often after.
Did you notice how those statements do not work for the product IE. It seams no matter how many upgrade you go for, the day after: same appocalipse. It seams no matter how much you know about it: the day after your sent back to play ground questions: "Is there still any window?"
In other words: It's like one paying to have a window replaced by a brick wall. And the day after the wall is by magic turned back into a window.
I don't care which window I use. I just don't accepte obscurantisme.
You know the reason I don't use IE ?
It's because often when I hit the button "stop", it dosen't ! Really. Like you close the window, and lock it, but magic-magic, it's open when you look at it 5 minutes later. It baffles me.
I guess http://www.microsoft.com/mscorp/facts/default.asp could be moded up as "funny".
Could it be just loads of fud (http://fud-counter.nl.linux.org/) ?
In the symantec article (I could access it) it is suggested : "Turn off and remove unneeded services." I can't help laugh. Buy a blue-tooth enabled mobile phone, and turn off blue tooth stuff as soon as you have it out of the box... Or pay to have something removing the stuff you paid to get.
Hum... may I suggest not ot get such a mobile phone ?
By the way, turning off what I don't need, is something I do with my car, my house, my computer... That is why I have no viruses, no slow down, no whatever I don't want. It's a kind of brake-through: don't use what what you don't need, you'll have less problemes. Ho peoples, I am in great shape today !
A good few years now I am avoiding IE.
But I have trouble justifying it, because I don't follow the weekly noise around IE. We know it is a risky and costly business to use IE in a prod environment. It has been demonstrated over and over. Because it's user-friendly-first, which is good, it is dangerouse. It's a known problem.
So I don't follow IE epics. I do my job. And I don't know how to convince people to just be safe, not even don't use IE, but just don't use proven dangerous stuff. What can I do ?
Ciao ciao.
I'd say you are hitting the bottom line of the problem. As mentioned in many posts, prices for CD are just too high. Maybe because price covers not only infrastructure and work, but also the traditional eco ~=+15% bonanza to investors. This +15% in plainly *not reasonable*. This is greed.
Those lads prefer loosing sells by keeping prices up *and* loosing money in pointless copy-protection inventions *and* loosing money in endless law suite... Let's be realistic any soft-protection is by nature doomed.
But now, we have online tune websites. Selling at ~=1.5 EUR the item. I wonder what to do: cry or laugh? Problem is not the media but the price. I obviously will not buy more tune on such a web site: it is TOO expensive.
Once again, labels prefer wasting fortunes on new media/law/systems instead of putting the price to DESCENT values. An investor doing no work doesn't deserve any compensation. OK, yes he does but certainly not this incredible 15%.
I got a story saying it could be cheaper to order in Asia a European CD, produced in Europe. As opposed to buying the same CD in Europe. Isn't it the proof that prices are actually outrageously high ?
Anyone doing a web/press review will find many articles claiming internet/CD copies are damaging CD sells as well as it's contrary. What to believe ? Experience shows it is better to really listen to something before buying. Therefore internet free duplication actually could be raising the sells. Just do a search now on "CD piracy music article press", I ended on WP article "Study: File-Sharing No Threat to Music Sales" as top list finding. Funny isn't it ? I got look on french news, pretty much the same kind of results.
Isn't it this fight against piracy fake ? Real problem could be greede investors not accepting only descent revenue ?
Zijus
--
I've never ever downloaded any piece of music over the internet. Believe it ?
My experience was in an environment where we had to maintain many UNIX's and NT's platform in order to certify product on all.
When one have an "old" NT box for example, all auto-update functionnality can be considered as somehow viruses : without warning it will change your environment. I faced several time our source code control system beeing screwed by those auto-updates, because some common stuff is changed in an incompatible way. The culprit was the... antivirus system. Result : production stoped, manual inevestigation... When you have all you prod automated from compile to package including tests, that's kind of pretty bad effect caused by something pretending to protect you.
When we look at the end of the day: the ressource is hijacked for non essential activities, not even in reaction to a real problem. That is why I eventually consider many "protections" as mal-ware. Could spybot auto-update be considered like that ?
I am pretty reluctant in anything changing a machine "automaticaly", even more users installing rubbish on a box.
I prefer to see myself what is there with www.windowsstartup.com. Hum sure : this does not work if you have to maintain 10s of boxes.
Probably the best solution is do not use an OS so subject to downgrades, just do not even have the possibility of a problem.
Ciao ciao.
The easiest pollution to clean is the one not generated.
By default I, the user, do not accept any email.
You want to email me ? So text me first with the address you are gonna use and convice me it's interesting. Then I will enable this address, and you'll email me as much as you from now on.
OK. Sounds heavy for me the user and for sender. Well, isn't it what we need, something heavier ?
Now, we could imagine something much more automated and simpler. The sender text (paying the price) and, this automaticaly enable texted email address. Would be transparent for me, the recipient. This service could be optional for me. And all ran at server level. (Certainly not on my box.)
This way
- I the recipient, am sure I don't receive anything unwanted
- I, the sender, am ok to pay the price of a text for 200/300 addresses
- I, the spammer, am screwed.
How about mailing lists ? Well, the old proactive systems works fine. I can subscribe to a list deliberatly. Then list address would be accepted. An already subscribed spammer can be removed. And this spammer would have to repay a text with an other email address.
Alltogether, this would keep the openness of SMTP for whoever wants. The payment question would be handled through well tested phone&text system. ( Hum... txt is fare from being generalized. That's a big hick up. ) The sapmmer would be slowed down.
A flaw ?
This could be perverted by back door system. A box is infected with stuff not only sending mail automaticaly but also automaticaly texting ? And back to starting point... Ooohh sh..ugar!