At this point does any tech savvy user still have the Java Runtime Environment installed?
At this point does any tech savvy user don't know the difference between the Java Runtime Environment and the Java Browser Plugin? Just disable/remove the plugin.
While we are at it let's get rid of Python and Ruby which are associated with web exploits in recent news (The Ruby SQL injection being the latest) . It would make more sense to say "Just remove java plugins".
Don't punish an entire language because of a bad implementation of a function that either uses the language or extends the language into where it really isn't needed anymore.
Except that the ESR was the consumer version at some point of its lifetime. If the consumer version had the issue that you described it would have been fixed at the next point release. Basically the ESR just extends the major version lifetime, it is not a separate product.
When the next major version of firefox is released, only the browsers on the consumer release channel will get the update. The ESR versions will not see the update. Later on if a major security vulnerability is discovered in the ESR branch, Mozilla will issue an update to the ESR branch. Also if that update "broke" the ESR branch I'm pretty damn sure Mozilla will push out a fix. I believe the number of updates to the ESR branch once the consumer release channel jumps to the next major version will drop to a very low number... (if any).
The ESR allows the IT department to manage the update process which is what the GP was alleging was missing therefore less enterprise worthy than windows.
If you are going to accuse me of making a lie of omission, you need to not base that accusation on another "lie of omission". Let me quote the whole paragraph below with the omitted portion in bold:
"Maintenance of each ESR, through point releases, is limited to high-risk/high-impact security vulnerabilities and in rare cases may also include off-schedule releases that address live security vulnerabilities. Backports of any functional enhancements and/or stability fixes are not in scope."
The above policy seems reasonable and addresses the concerns of the enterprise users.
I still don't understand how pointing out that your argument completely ignores the existence of the ESR is a "lie of omission". I'll throw it in the "grasping at straws" bin.
And your narrow-mindedness is annoying. Do you know why Microsoft only releases patches once a month for its operating systems?
And your complaining about the mainstream version of Firefox while ignoring the existence of the enterprise version of Firefox makes your argument disingenuous.
Actually the purpose for this shenanigan was to introduce a rumor that Obama was in fact going to mint a $1 trillion coin so that the conservative pundits would have something to rile up their audience with.
Encryption is slow. If you have ever did healthcare data, there is just so much data that encryption can add hours to your tasks.
No excuse. I deal with tons of data and by federal directive my laptop must have full disk encryption. It took 5 days to completely encrypt my laptop but now that it is encrypted, it has not added "hours" to my tasks. In fact it is barely noticeable. You do not have to have the data stored on your laptop either, you could have remote access to patient records.
Combined with the fact that Health care organizations are just starting to invest into skilled workers, but still are dominated by a bunch of people who worked their way into IT, they were in accounting or in billing who got transferred to IT 20 years ago.
These self learned and worked in the institution so long they really don't know how to think in terms of security. They bitch and moan when a vender wisely disables FTP. And will do stupid think like export a SQL db to access, so they can report on it.
I doubt your statement is accurate. The main hospital in my home town always hired competent IT staff. In fact they influenced the type of computer courses offered at the local university since the early 80s.
HIPAA combined with Meaning Full Use. Has made these older healthcare IT obsolete, however organization that suppose care wont fire them. Creating problems for the new set of people skilled in IT. And having a bunch of stupid tasks that distract them from doing the right thing.
What do you base this on? The main hospital in my area do regular HIPAA compliance audits and employee training. People have actually gotten fired for violating the hospital privacy rules.
C and C++ are still the best languages for parallelism, in particular vectorization and shared memory systems.
That's hard to believe since parallelism isn't actually part of the language but tacked on as a library. C11 and C++11 have added some parallel features but these aren't implemented yet and much less mature.
I'd be more inclined to believe you if you said Fortran or even Ada.
Just because the language doesn't hold your hand and make sure you don't mess up doesn't necessarily make it a "bad" language. C++ could never fully take C's role due to the name mangling that C++ requires. I use and like C++ but there are somethings that are best left to C. Especially if you're binding compiled code to some interpreted language (e.g. Perl, Python, or Ruby) to speed up some computationally intensive portion of an application.
We are talking about a 23 year old. He is going to have to "grow up" and, from what I read in the article, the parents even nudged him into getting a job which he later quit because he didn't like it. The parents shouldn't be held hostage by their parasitic adult child. Besides, we are talking about China. I'm sure the government has a solution.
True. However I have gotten the impression that on occasion some features came from the SDK and not AOSP due to AOSP's lagging behind the version released on current handsets. Of course, this may be the motivation behind Google's changes. The lag between the community version and what is given to handset manufacturers provides an incentive to be a member of their alliance.
The Android platform has some fragmentation problems and there's been endless bitching about them on Slashdot.
Bullocks. Google could just use their trademark to enforce compliance, you know like OpenJDK does. They could simply only grant the right to use "Android" on distributions certified to be compliant.
Besides the fragmentation that people were complaining about were cause by Google themselves.
It seems as though they are trying to prevent fork's even at the the sdk level. Unless for any reason the cyanogenmod team modified the sdk to make their builds we shouldn't see any problems from there.
" load any part of the SDK onto a mobile handset or any other hardware device except a personal computer, combine any part of the SDK with other software, or distribute any software or device incorporating a part of the SDK" seems to say otherwise.
I don't know why the summary concentrated on the copy provisions. Here is the complete clause #3.2. Emphasis is mine:
3.3 You may not use the SDK for any purpose not expressly permitted by this License Agreement. Except to the extent required by applicable third party licenses, you may not: (a) copy (except for backup purposes), modify, adapt, redistribute, decompile, reverse engineer, disassemble, or create derivative works of the SDK or any part of the SDK; or (b) load any part of the SDK onto a mobile handset or any other hardware device except a personal computer, combine any part of the SDK with other software, or distribute any software or device incorporating a part of the SDK.
If I were the parents, I'd wait until they were convicted, then discuss sentencing options and see about making sure the harm is minimized.
Actually I would have my lawyer discuss with the DA a deal that involves involuntary commitment with reasonable terms to a mental health facility in lieu of conviction and formal sentencing. This way my child has no choice but to seek professional help and the parents of my child's friend will have no choice but to do the same.
If my child acted alone, I would most likely not press charges and just seek professional help. However if I was in the same situation as these parents, I probably would turn my child over to the authorities. Not because I think I need the state to get involved with my parenting, but because chances are pretty damn good that the friend put my child (in the story the friend provided the sleeping pills) up to this and I need the state to force the friend's parent to seek help. Besides the DA would probably take the plea deal in exchange for testimony against the child that provided the prescription drugs.
Regardless of the uncomfortable situation the parents found themselves in, ignoring the problem and hoping the behavior improves doesn't seem a viable option.
Look, Anonymous Coward, if a drugged parent went to the store, fell asleep, and killed someone,
the kids would be charged with manslaughter.
There is a very good chance that the parent would be the one charged with manslaughter. The prosecution would probably make a case stating that the parent should have realized (s)he was impaired when (s)he was driving the vehicle. There are cases where drivers were convicted for DUI when they wrecked while under a "sleep side effect" of Ambien.
Slashdot Mirror
At this point does any tech savvy user don't know the difference between the Java Runtime Environment and the Java Browser Plugin? Just disable/remove the plugin.
While we are at it let's get rid of Python and Ruby which are associated with web exploits in recent news (The Ruby SQL injection being the latest) . It would make more sense to say "Just remove java plugins".
Don't punish an entire language because of a bad implementation of a function that either uses the language or extends the language into where it really isn't needed anymore.
Yet it covers up the other smells...
Should you put "and" in quotes or should we wait for the rest of the sentence?
I want to be a grammar nazi too. ;-)
Except that the ESR was the consumer version at some point of its lifetime. If the consumer version had the issue that you described it would have been fixed at the next point release. Basically the ESR just extends the major version lifetime, it is not a separate product.
When the next major version of firefox is released, only the browsers on the consumer release channel will get the update. The ESR versions will not see the update. Later on if a major security vulnerability is discovered in the ESR branch, Mozilla will issue an update to the ESR branch. Also if that update "broke" the ESR branch I'm pretty damn sure Mozilla will push out a fix. I believe the number of updates to the ESR branch once the consumer release channel jumps to the next major version will drop to a very low number... (if any).
The ESR allows the IT department to manage the update process which is what the GP was alleging was missing therefore less enterprise worthy than windows.
It is still vaporware now.
If you are going to accuse me of making a lie of omission, you need to not base that accusation on another "lie of omission". Let me quote the whole paragraph below with the omitted portion in bold:
"Maintenance of each ESR, through point releases, is limited to high-risk/high-impact security vulnerabilities and in rare cases may also include off-schedule releases that address live security vulnerabilities. Backports of any functional enhancements and/or stability fixes are not in scope."
The above policy seems reasonable and addresses the concerns of the enterprise users.
I still don't understand how pointing out that your argument completely ignores the existence of the ESR is a "lie of omission". I'll throw it in the "grasping at straws" bin.
And your complaining about the mainstream version of Firefox while ignoring the existence of the enterprise version of Firefox makes your argument disingenuous.
Here let me get you started: http://www.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/organizations/
Actually the purpose for this shenanigan was to introduce a rumor that Obama was in fact going to mint a $1 trillion coin so that the conservative pundits would have something to rile up their audience with.
No excuse. I deal with tons of data and by federal directive my laptop must have full disk encryption. It took 5 days to completely encrypt my laptop but now that it is encrypted, it has not added "hours" to my tasks. In fact it is barely noticeable. You do not have to have the data stored on your laptop either, you could have remote access to patient records.
I doubt your statement is accurate. The main hospital in my home town always hired competent IT staff. In fact they influenced the type of computer courses offered at the local university since the early 80s.
What do you base this on? The main hospital in my area do regular HIPAA compliance audits and employee training. People have actually gotten fired for violating the hospital privacy rules.
That's hard to believe since parallelism isn't actually part of the language but tacked on as a library. C11 and C++11 have added some parallel features but these aren't implemented yet and much less mature.
I'd be more inclined to believe you if you said Fortran or even Ada.
I think you may be confused. Games like all software should be free in RMS' eyes. I doubt you'll find an XBox or Playstation at RMS' house.
Gaming consoles are pretty jails too.
When I see this I can't help but to see bitter jealousy.
Just because the language doesn't hold your hand and make sure you don't mess up doesn't necessarily make it a "bad" language. C++ could never fully take C's role due to the name mangling that C++ requires. I use and like C++ but there are somethings that are best left to C. Especially if you're binding compiled code to some interpreted language (e.g. Perl, Python, or Ruby) to speed up some computationally intensive portion of an application.
You are correct. I found a statement from Cyanogenmod stating as much after the release of the Ice Cream Sandwich SDK.
We are talking about a 23 year old. He is going to have to "grow up" and, from what I read in the article, the parents even nudged him into getting a job which he later quit because he didn't like it. The parents shouldn't be held hostage by their parasitic adult child. Besides, we are talking about China. I'm sure the government has a solution.
They could just cut him off. Only provide a place to live but with no internet or meals.
True. However I have gotten the impression that on occasion some features came from the SDK and not AOSP due to AOSP's lagging behind the version released on current handsets. Of course, this may be the motivation behind Google's changes. The lag between the community version and what is given to handset manufacturers provides an incentive to be a member of their alliance.
I'd hope the details will come out during the inquiry. I think the police knows enough not to take the parent's word as gospel.
I think we found the panhandler with the golden retriever and expensive back pack. ;)
Bullocks. Google could just use their trademark to enforce compliance, you know like OpenJDK does. They could simply only grant the right to use "Android" on distributions certified to be compliant.
Besides the fragmentation that people were complaining about were cause by Google themselves.
" load any part of the SDK onto a mobile handset or any other hardware device except a personal computer, combine any part of the SDK with other software, or distribute any software or device incorporating a part of the SDK" seems to say otherwise.
I don't know why the summary concentrated on the copy provisions. Here is the complete clause #3.2. Emphasis is mine:
3.3 You may not use the SDK for any purpose not expressly permitted by this License Agreement. Except to the extent required by applicable third party licenses, you may not: (a) copy (except for backup purposes), modify, adapt, redistribute, decompile, reverse engineer, disassemble, or create derivative works of the SDK or any part of the SDK; or (b) load any part of the SDK onto a mobile handset or any other hardware device except a personal computer, combine any part of the SDK with other software, or distribute any software or device incorporating a part of the SDK.
Actually I would have my lawyer discuss with the DA a deal that involves involuntary commitment with reasonable terms to a mental health facility in lieu of conviction and formal sentencing. This way my child has no choice but to seek professional help and the parents of my child's friend will have no choice but to do the same.
If my child acted alone, I would most likely not press charges and just seek professional help. However if I was in the same situation as these parents, I probably would turn my child over to the authorities. Not because I think I need the state to get involved with my parenting, but because chances are pretty damn good that the friend put my child (in the story the friend provided the sleeping pills) up to this and I need the state to force the friend's parent to seek help. Besides the DA would probably take the plea deal in exchange for testimony against the child that provided the prescription drugs.
Regardless of the uncomfortable situation the parents found themselves in, ignoring the problem and hoping the behavior improves doesn't seem a viable option.
There is a very good chance that the parent would be the one charged with manslaughter. The prosecution would probably make a case stating that the parent should have realized (s)he was impaired when (s)he was driving the vehicle. There are cases where drivers were convicted for DUI when they wrecked while under a "sleep side effect" of Ambien.