The "left right" continuum is itself variable. It does not have anything resembling a fixed point of reference. That's actually the reason it's such a popular idiom for political discussions, because nothing that is measured by it, can be applied to anything else. The same criteria that are "left" of one opponent may be "right" of another opponent with the same ideas.
Less than six years. I'm sure it seemed like a long time to its contemporaries, given the state of total war, the nationalized production, and the casualties.
Even a "true expert enterprise-grade programmer" doesn't necessarily know until the requirements are gathered, who gets to make what posts to the General Ledger, who gets to approve Sales Invoices at what levels, under what other business constraints, etc. This is the layer where enterprise security actually lives, and the only thing your programming language and runtime implementation can do is to assure you that when you do implement these constraints, there won't be any unknown back doors to get around the rules. (There will always be *known* back doors.)
Do people really expect their programming language to codify and enforce constraints like "third shift receiving manager may not accept shipments without an authorization XYZ..."
I expect a runtime environment to prevent that user from doing anything at all that could work around this kind of constraint. And, of course, template-driven web applications with business logic in Java on a well-secured server, with a database on a separate well-secured server, gets the job done just fine, and in an abundantly secure fashion.
(I realize the article refers to lower-level security in the context of parallel and distributed runtimes, which is something that I'm actually interested in, from an academic point of view. I took grad courses in parallel and distributed computing but this research has been of little to no use in the real world.)
Our homegrown SOA has security constraints at every initialization and every commit. The same conditions exist for the Entity layer as for the service, but are separately managed. Essentially, unless you explicitly make your service "non secured", you have to give it a role-hierarchy based graph of security constraints. We have a well-defined way of doing this, and it is a primary consideration of everything we add to the system.
That's not the same as "adding security to the language", but in my world it is much more relevant.
AOP is a means to the end for an architecture like this, but AOP is not in and of itself, the end result.
Juries get to decide what is reasonable. On the other hand, juries are fairly easily persuaded to adopt surprisingly totalitarian ideals when it comes to government power.
It might. Do you have a source for Tin (Sn/50?) The largest piece of tin foil I have ever seen was about 5cm square. I don't know where you'd get enough tin foil for a full body suit, but I guess you could reclaim it from pewter tableware and from solder.
Is this a sign that the mini-bubble that led to something like a Facebook game being "worth" over a billion dollars.... that bubble might be showing signs of a leak?
Bear in mind that for a while, Blizzard has been taking orders from people whose positions of power came from the success of the Shrek video game franchise and Guitar Hero. If you're expecting these people to understand the value of a grass roots developer community, think again. It's not just that they are hostile, it's that they just plain don't get it. And if you've ever been down the org chart from someone who makes decisions like this, you understand that you really don't get the opportunity to explain it to them, or if you try, they still don't get it (and you end up with even *less* power.)
I don't know, but I'm guessing that a lot of the talent that Blizzard had, moved on to greener pastures and we're seeing the consequences of that in their games.
The kicker is that these decision makers are probably right. They are probably driving a quarter or two of unprecedented growth for the company.
>First of all, I heard anecdotal evidence that 50% of laptops at Java One were Macs.
A lot of us really want to have a unix-based system, even if only for the shell. With a lot of effort, and Cygwin, we can get there on a Windows notebook. With luck, we can install Linux on a notebook and have stuff like Wi-Fi, Audio, DVD playback, and good enough battery life for travelling and working remotely, and to be honest I have never seen all of that in one system. The Macbook may not be the best notebook in the world, but it *does* travel really well, and is, out of the box, pretty much everything that a Linux user wants, without giving up access to Apples really good effort at making a user shell.
Don't underestimate the appeal that the Macbook has for developers, regardless of the platform they develop for.
The real surprise for me, is not seeing 99.44% of the developers at various conferences who are stuck with only Microsoft tools doing vertical development for 100% Microsoft shops. That's where I would think the world is with *everything else* being the tiny fringe minority anyway.
>OS X is marginal desktop platform
Among wide swaths of the community of application developers for various platforms, the Apple portables are very, very popular. For some, they are the only serious choice. They are extremely practical to travel with, and run a flavor of unix that is good enough. If the alternative is to run a windows notebook (with Cygwin, or god forbid without it) or boot Linux on it, the Macbook offers a really great option. The pervasive issues with Linux on your typical consumer notebook remain. I know there are workarounds, but when you think about what the Macbook is, right out of the box, it is for many developers (especially those who travel and do a lot of remote work) a very obvious choice.
>All of my banking website depend heavily on JavaScript, but not a single one uses java.
Don't make that bet that the bank's General Ledger transactions and their reporting don't use Java. I can assure you that they do. I'll go further and say that they probably use some SAP product or another, and have substantial parts of their customizations in Java. You are seeing "Java" strictly from the point of view of the end user on a web application, where it wouldn't even be appropriate to find Java. You're not considering the huge amount of business software that's deployed in JVMs. There's a whole lot of Java out there that you'll never "see". It's been moving into a space over the past decade or so that used to be dominated by COBOL which you also didn't "see".
Why do you assume it was a low wage? There were some investors that were pretty interested in the project. When I was considering it, there was something in the ballpark of $75K on the table. But I wasn't willing to quit my job to do this, and neither was anyone else, and the investors moved on.
I'd name the investors and everyone who was in the project, but this is the wrong place to do that, and I've said too much already.
They expected more cancer and a raging firestorm
that'd burn the rest of the city.
Who are "they?"
You are suggesting that the people who actually built the bombs had no idea of their capabilities. That's bunk.
The "DRM" is a symptom of a bigger problem -- someone very high up at Activision is hell bent on the whole competitive PVP element being the thing that drives the market. PVP means you have to deal with other people. Some can handle that, and others can't. But once you make your game into this intense worldwide competition for individual and team achievements, then there is going to be a rift between players who just want to play a computer game casually, and those who have nothing but contempt for the "casuals."
I played Diablo I. I liked it a lot -- it was a Roguelike game.
It was really one of the first games to do a good job of taking that genre to the video game level. I played Diablo2 and the expansion quite a lot also, and jumped over to World of Warcraft when that came out.
With the last patch to WoW, Blizzard has cured my addiction to their games. They did this in the nick of time, too, because I would probably have bought D3, SC2 and Cata just out of habit. I kicked the habit, though, thanks to Blizzard's own efforts. My Bnet subscription expired yesterday and I'm not even experiencing withdrawal symptoms.
>Hiroshima wasn't nearly as bad as people thought it would be.
It was pretty much totally flattened and killed at least half the population instantly, with most of the rest of the population dying within a month.
How much worse do you think "people thought it would be?" How many people do you think knew about it at all?
I'm quite sure that if the President decides to launch an attack, the attack will be launched, if he has to drive to the base himself with the whole Joint Chiefs panel and personally see to it.
Codes or no codes, with the whole top of the chain of command in the launch control post giving the order in person, it will happen, period. I assure you that it will. The codes and the protocols are more of a way of enforcing a default chain of command, controls against the orders being given improperly, etc. But in the military, procedures and controls are changed as a function of the authority that exists to change them. That's true in the supply chain, trucking, shipping and receiving parts of the Army, and it's true for the authority that rests directly on the President and the brass.
That said, while the notion that President Clinton "lost the football" is pretty amusing, it's also the kind of thing that should *never* be disclosed. I wonder when we lost the idea of "loose lips sink ships?" In my opinion, the public knows FAR too many details about military operations, and I believe this puts the country at a disadvantage. There's a lot of stuff that just plain shouldn't be talked about, ever, period, whether we are at war or not.
"May we conclude the same thing about iOS based on this logic, too? If Flash isn't considered 'necessary' for Linux, why should it be deemed 'necessary' for any other device or platform?"
Flash isn't "necessary." What's "necessary" is a medium for interactive games and amateur videos on the web. Flash created a medium for that, it became so popular that it helped define the internet, and people want to create and consume that content. It may not be 'necessary', but then neither is corn, petroleum, or helium.
Some real progress was made in the early development of Gnash. There were people underwriting the project who were willing and able to pay a living wage to developers who could finish it, but that talent didn't really come forward. Those people have pretty much moved on to other projects. (You know who you are, and I know way more about this than I'm going to say in a slashdot post.) I was plugged into the Gnash project for a while, and I thought it was really interesting. But even a commercial venture will fail if it can't acquire talent.
Slashdot Mirror
The "left right" continuum is itself variable. It does not have anything resembling a fixed point of reference. That's actually the reason it's such a popular idiom for political discussions, because nothing that is measured by it, can be applied to anything else. The same criteria that are "left" of one opponent may be "right" of another opponent with the same ideas.
And I realize that WWII is not completely distinct from WWI.
Nevertheless, it is not a radical position to state that WWII began in 1939 and ended in 1945.
Italy in Ethiopia, Japan in Manchuria and Nanking, and the Spanish Civil War are all certainly worthy of consideration.
>World War 2 took a long time.
Less than six years. I'm sure it seemed like a long time to its contemporaries, given the state of total war, the nationalized production, and the casualties.
Even a "true expert enterprise-grade programmer" doesn't necessarily know until the requirements are gathered, who gets to make what posts to the General Ledger, who gets to approve Sales Invoices at what levels, under what other business constraints, etc. This is the layer where enterprise security actually lives, and the only thing your programming language and runtime implementation can do is to assure you that when you do implement these constraints, there won't be any unknown back doors to get around the rules. (There will always be *known* back doors.)
Do people really expect their programming language to codify and enforce constraints like "third shift receiving manager may not accept shipments without an authorization XYZ..."
I expect a runtime environment to prevent that user from doing anything at all that could work around this kind of constraint. And, of course, template-driven web applications with business logic in Java on a well-secured server, with a database on a separate well-secured server, gets the job done just fine, and in an abundantly secure fashion.
(I realize the article refers to lower-level security in the context of parallel and distributed runtimes, which is something that I'm actually interested in, from an academic point of view. I took grad courses in parallel and distributed computing but this research has been of little to no use in the real world.)
Our homegrown SOA has security constraints at every initialization and every commit. The same conditions exist for the Entity layer as for the service, but are separately managed. Essentially, unless you explicitly make your service "non secured", you have to give it a role-hierarchy based graph of security constraints. We have a well-defined way of doing this, and it is a primary consideration of everything we add to the system.
That's not the same as "adding security to the language", but in my world it is much more relevant.
AOP is a means to the end for an architecture like this, but AOP is not in and of itself, the end result.
Juries get to decide what is reasonable.
On the other hand, juries are fairly easily persuaded to adopt surprisingly totalitarian ideals when it comes to government power.
It might. Do you have a source for Tin (Sn/50?) The largest piece of tin foil I have ever seen was about 5cm square. I don't know where you'd get enough tin foil for a full body suit, but I guess you could reclaim it from pewter tableware and from solder.
I thought this article was pretty good.
http://www.askapache.com/linux-unix/optimize-nice-ionice.html
Yes, because everybody knows that kernel scheduling algorithms are far more tunable on Windows than on Linux.
This problem is highly visible in VMs. When you have one VM doing write-heavy disk IO, the other VMs suffer.
I don't think it's a Linux problem as much as a general problem of the compromises that must be made by any scheduling algorithm.
What about you Linux mainframe guys? You have unbeatable IO subsystems. Do you see the same problems?
Is this a sign that the mini-bubble that led to something like a Facebook game being "worth" over a billion dollars.... that bubble might be showing signs of a leak?
Bear in mind that for a while, Blizzard has been taking orders from people whose positions of power came from the success of the Shrek video game franchise and Guitar Hero. If you're expecting these people to understand the value of a grass roots developer community, think again. It's not just that they are hostile, it's that they just plain don't get it. And if you've ever been down the org chart from someone who makes decisions like this, you understand that you really don't get the opportunity to explain it to them, or if you try, they still don't get it (and you end up with even *less* power.)
I don't know, but I'm guessing that a lot of the talent that Blizzard had, moved on to greener pastures and we're seeing the consequences of that in their games.
The kicker is that these decision makers are probably right. They are probably driving a quarter or two of unprecedented growth for the company.
>First of all, I heard anecdotal evidence that 50% of laptops at Java One were Macs. A lot of us really want to have a unix-based system, even if only for the shell. With a lot of effort, and Cygwin, we can get there on a Windows notebook. With luck, we can install Linux on a notebook and have stuff like Wi-Fi, Audio, DVD playback, and good enough battery life for travelling and working remotely, and to be honest I have never seen all of that in one system. The Macbook may not be the best notebook in the world, but it *does* travel really well, and is, out of the box, pretty much everything that a Linux user wants, without giving up access to Apples really good effort at making a user shell. Don't underestimate the appeal that the Macbook has for developers, regardless of the platform they develop for. The real surprise for me, is not seeing 99.44% of the developers at various conferences who are stuck with only Microsoft tools doing vertical development for 100% Microsoft shops. That's where I would think the world is with *everything else* being the tiny fringe minority anyway.
>OS X is marginal desktop platform Among wide swaths of the community of application developers for various platforms, the Apple portables are very, very popular. For some, they are the only serious choice. They are extremely practical to travel with, and run a flavor of unix that is good enough. If the alternative is to run a windows notebook (with Cygwin, or god forbid without it) or boot Linux on it, the Macbook offers a really great option. The pervasive issues with Linux on your typical consumer notebook remain. I know there are workarounds, but when you think about what the Macbook is, right out of the box, it is for many developers (especially those who travel and do a lot of remote work) a very obvious choice.
>All of my banking website depend heavily on JavaScript, but not a single one uses java. Don't make that bet that the bank's General Ledger transactions and their reporting don't use Java. I can assure you that they do. I'll go further and say that they probably use some SAP product or another, and have substantial parts of their customizations in Java. You are seeing "Java" strictly from the point of view of the end user on a web application, where it wouldn't even be appropriate to find Java. You're not considering the huge amount of business software that's deployed in JVMs. There's a whole lot of Java out there that you'll never "see". It's been moving into a space over the past decade or so that used to be dominated by COBOL which you also didn't "see".
Well, you can already buy InTrade shares on President Obama not being on the ballot in 2012. Good luck.
Why do you assume it was a low wage? There were some investors that were pretty interested in the project. When I was considering it, there was something in the ballpark of $75K on the table. But I wasn't willing to quit my job to do this, and neither was anyone else, and the investors moved on. I'd name the investors and everyone who was in the project, but this is the wrong place to do that, and I've said too much already.
They expected more cancer and a raging firestorm that'd burn the rest of the city. Who are "they?" You are suggesting that the people who actually built the bombs had no idea of their capabilities. That's bunk.
The "DRM" is a symptom of a bigger problem -- someone very high up at Activision is hell bent on the whole competitive PVP element being the thing that drives the market. PVP means you have to deal with other people. Some can handle that, and others can't. But once you make your game into this intense worldwide competition for individual and team achievements, then there is going to be a rift between players who just want to play a computer game casually, and those who have nothing but contempt for the "casuals."
I played Diablo I. I liked it a lot -- it was a Roguelike game. It was really one of the first games to do a good job of taking that genre to the video game level. I played Diablo2 and the expansion quite a lot also, and jumped over to World of Warcraft when that came out. With the last patch to WoW, Blizzard has cured my addiction to their games. They did this in the nick of time, too, because I would probably have bought D3, SC2 and Cata just out of habit. I kicked the habit, though, thanks to Blizzard's own efforts. My Bnet subscription expired yesterday and I'm not even experiencing withdrawal symptoms.
>Hiroshima wasn't nearly as bad as people thought it would be.
It was pretty much totally flattened and killed at least half the population instantly, with most of the rest of the population dying within a month.
How much worse do you think "people thought it would be?" How many people do you think knew about it at all?
I'm quite sure that if the President decides to launch an attack, the attack will be launched, if he has to drive to the base himself with the whole Joint Chiefs panel and personally see to it.
Codes or no codes, with the whole top of the chain of command in the launch control post giving the order in person, it will happen, period. I assure you that it will. The codes and the protocols are more of a way of enforcing a default chain of command, controls against the orders being given improperly, etc. But in the military, procedures and controls are changed as a function of the authority that exists to change them. That's true in the supply chain, trucking, shipping and receiving parts of the Army, and it's true for the authority that rests directly on the President and the brass.
That said, while the notion that President Clinton "lost the football" is pretty amusing, it's also the kind of thing that should *never* be disclosed. I wonder when we lost the idea of "loose lips sink ships?" In my opinion, the public knows FAR too many details about military operations, and I believe this puts the country at a disadvantage. There's a lot of stuff that just plain shouldn't be talked about, ever, period, whether we are at war or not.
"May we conclude the same thing about iOS based on this logic, too? If Flash isn't considered 'necessary' for Linux, why should it be deemed 'necessary' for any other device or platform?"
Flash isn't "necessary." What's "necessary" is a medium for interactive games and amateur videos on the web. Flash created a medium for that, it became so popular that it helped define the internet, and people want to create and consume that content. It may not be 'necessary', but then neither is corn, petroleum, or helium.
>Basically, Gnash just isn't there yet.
Some real progress was made in the early development of Gnash. There were people underwriting the project who were willing and able to pay a living wage to developers who could finish it, but that talent didn't really come forward. Those people have pretty much moved on to other projects. (You know who you are, and I know way more about this than I'm going to say in a slashdot post.) I was plugged into the Gnash project for a while, and I thought it was really interesting. But even a commercial venture will fail if it can't acquire talent.
>He should have listened to his mother and watched that tongue.
His mother wanted him to be a lawyer. He wanted to be a rabbi.