I can see a future where if a linux app isn't certified by [some venture] then PHBs will refuse to have it on their systems,...
Do you mean that the future will be exactly like the past and present?
If you have a PHB who does this, consider yourself lucky -- sure, it's stupid, but at least it saves time. If you work for a company that is large enough, it'll form its own certification review board (and if you misbehave, you'll get to serve on it).
... its-all-just-fun gay bashing "f4gg0RT" repartee on places like Slashdot and major mailing lists.
I don't see that on SlashDot, except for lame loser trolls. And if I saw that on any mailing list I subscribe to, the author would regret it.
I won't claim that the IT world is free of intolerance (of any sort) but I know quite a few openly homosexual people who don't seem to have any problem with it (and many seem to find IT careers more tolerant of diverse lifestyles than other fields in which they have worked). I'm sure that there are exceptions -- and it only takes one asshole to make a mailing list unpleasant -- but you are over-generalizing.
I find it a bit odd that for some people, their main qualification is what they have done, and for others it is where they work now. Does it really matter that so-and-so is now with Google, Sun, Microsoft, etc?
To make matters worse, they got wrong the only one that might actually matter: Danny Hillis founded Thinking Machines, not "Think Machines". Huge difference.
Should have mentioned that I'm running FreeBSD 4.10, so I had to build it myself instead of downloading a blessed build. (It's a bit of a nuisance that it seems to depend on a specific version of a dozen things, but so do lots of other things...)
It just randomly goes away and leaves core file in my home directory every so often. Since I started keeping track, I've noticed that I often get a core file after intentionally exiting. If there's a pattern, I haven't glimpsed it.
I would expect this sort of thing from Microsoft, Sony, maybe Apple (or Sun, my kind employer). But isn't Google supposed to be above this sort of crap?
You consider the security researchers incompetent because they are (or were) part of the Microsoft team?
Giving credit where credit is due, Microsoft has put together an awesome team of researchers in many areas, including security. The list of people who work for MSR is a who's who of CS. The problem is that these guys ain't them. They might have a lot of practical knowledge about how to make Windows secure (and practical knowledge is often the best kind...) but I'm not sure I'd call them researchers.
Maybe what we will see an end to is people applying "Moore's Observation" to everything that has anything to do with computers.
SCSI hard drive capacities aren't increasing as fast as they were simply because the demand isn't there; the emphasis is on performance rather than capacity. If there was a market demand for 400G SCSI drives, they'd be available today.
I liked THX1138 a lot. American Graffiti was great. Star Wars 4-6: when they came out, people were amazed. The Indiana Jones still looks good (well, except for maybe the last one).
That's quite a successful run. Maybe not a "lifetime" of achievement, but a bunch of great and/or insanely popular movies in a short period of time.
It's unfortunate that the recent stuff sucks, but he's still got a pretty amazing record.
Imagine the time and persistance it took to find 400 Chinese porn sites, what with the Chinese government breathing down your neck and all that. This author is no simple script kiddie; this is a wormer who has corporate sponsorship and/or does all his browsing with one hand...
Not necessarily. There was no solid proof that the Coelacanth still existed until only a few years ago:
1938 is more than a "few years ago"... and they weren't legendary creatures with unlikely attributes like being vegetarians able to kill the dominant predator in their environment despite weighing less than half as much...
There are all kinds of interesting things left to discover in the depths of the ocean -- every deep-sea expedition comes back with something (sometimes many things) new and amazing -- but the notion of such a creature hiding near well-populated and hunted areas seems unlikely. Not impossible, of course, but I think we're more likely to find a saquatch or yeti.
If we found something interesting it would attract more investment. People would be more interested in conserving it.
That can't help but make me skeptical -- these people have a compelling reason to hype these reports in order to encourage conservation and protection of the area.
It would be pretty interesting if it's true, however -- my guess would be that a large animal capable of avoiding detection for so long in well-explored areas would be interestingly intelligent...
I don't think that there are many people who are opposed to paying people the cost of developing some form of information + reasonable profits.
I don't think that there are many people who are opposed to grabbing stuff for free if they think they can get away with it.
... copyright monopoly only lasts until the creator receives the cost of production plus reasonable profit.
This doesn't make sense. This means that if you are a terrible artist you get to keep your monopoly forever, but if you are brilliant the benefit you gain from your work is limited to whatever is deemed "reasonable profit." Personally, I have no problem throwing my money onto the mammoth pile of money already earned by some of my favorite artists, because I enjoy their work and it's worth something to me. Who is to say that a gifted artist shouldn't be wealthy?
For what it's worth though, I'd also say that folks gainfully employed in a research facility or "top university" are also earning a paycheck that provides them a fairly comfortable living. When you compare them to the "average person on the outside with a family", you have to figure that many of those "outsiders" are fighting a big financial battle too - and it puts a strain on their marriage/relationships.
I wasn't comparing them with the "average person on the outside..." but the average person that I know, which is a very different set. Among people with whom I went to school, there are many lawyers, doctors, business types, consultants, as well as plenty of code monkeys and cubicle fillers of various sorts. (Compared to that bunch, researchers are at the low end of the income scale, and junior professors are bringing up the rear.) I have no idea what the numbers are for the populace at large.
As it's often been pointed out, there are practically no scientists out there who have achieved any great/notable work after they were married and had kids.
I guess it depends on what your criteria for "great/notable work" is...
I've visited and/or have friends and former colleagues at many top universities and research labs. Compared to people I know from "outside", they are markedly more likely to be happily married (or be in very stable long-term relationships) and somewhat more likely to have kids -- and they've done interesting and important work while in this state.
Maybe solitary loaners excell in other fields, but building big systems is a team activity and people skills are important.
People with kids, mortgages, other debts, plans for the future... If you think a million dollars is a lot of money, well, you haven't tried to buy a house in a decent school district near Boston or Silicon Valley recently.
1) Donated a very large sum of money to a company that committed the legal equivalent of a suicide bombing against linux.
Or, in other terms, decided that it was cheaper to pay SCO a little money to ensure that SCO wouldn't bother them or their customers again. It certainly was a lot less expensive than the strategy that IBM is pursuing, for example.
2) Sold their soul to the devil (Microsoft) in return for temporary bankrucpy prevention.
Or, in other terms, took Microsoft to court, made our case, and in the end Microsoft decided it would be in their best interest to settle.
Plus, that part about "bankrupcy prevention" -- take a look at the balance sheet. While Sun certainly isn't raking in the money right now, they're not exactly teetering on the brink of chapter 11 either.
The first mainframe versions of Unix(R) were run on top of a modified version of CTSS.
That's not the way I remember it at all... Could provide a link or a little more detail?
Also CTSS is considered the father of Multics which in turn begat Unix.
That's sort of like saying that DOS is the father of Windows. Multics was a ground-up design to create an operating using lessons learned from CTSS (among others). One of those lessons was that they didn't want to it to be much like CTSS, IIRC.
The jump from MULTICS to UNIX was, again, a leap. UNIX doesn't share any code with Multics -- it borrowed some ideas, threw away many others, and added some that were new. This isn't quite what "begat" means.
Slashdot Mirror
Do you mean that the future will be exactly like the past and present?
If you have a PHB who does this, consider yourself lucky -- sure, it's stupid, but at least it saves time. If you work for a company that is large enough, it'll form its own certification review board (and if you misbehave, you'll get to serve on it).
I don't see that on SlashDot, except for lame loser trolls. And if I saw that on any mailing list I subscribe to, the author would regret it.
I won't claim that the IT world is free of intolerance (of any sort) but I know quite a few openly homosexual people who don't seem to have any problem with it (and many seem to find IT careers more tolerant of diverse lifestyles than other fields in which they have worked). I'm sure that there are exceptions -- and it only takes one asshole to make a mailing list unpleasant -- but you are over-generalizing.
To make matters worse, they got wrong the only one that might actually matter: Danny Hillis founded Thinking Machines, not "Think Machines". Huge difference.
I think you're confusing necessary with convenient. Otherwise, you'd have already bought a Treo or one of its ancestors.
Why would you want to write messages when you can simply speak them?
Giving credit where credit is due, Microsoft has put together an awesome team of researchers in many areas, including security. The list of people who work for MSR is a who's who of CS. The problem is that these guys ain't them. They might have a lot of practical knowledge about how to make Windows secure (and practical knowledge is often the best kind...) but I'm not sure I'd call them researchers.
Maybe what we will see an end to is people applying "Moore's Observation" to everything that has anything to do with computers.
SCSI hard drive capacities aren't increasing as fast as they were simply because the demand isn't there; the emphasis is on performance rather than capacity. If there was a market demand for 400G SCSI drives, they'd be available today.
That's quite a successful run. Maybe not a "lifetime" of achievement, but a bunch of great and/or insanely popular movies in a short period of time.
It's unfortunate that the recent stuff sucks, but he's still got a pretty amazing record.
1938 is more than a "few years ago"... and they weren't legendary creatures with unlikely attributes like being vegetarians able to kill the dominant predator in their environment despite weighing less than half as much...
There are all kinds of interesting things left to discover in the depths of the ocean -- every deep-sea expedition comes back with something (sometimes many things) new and amazing -- but the notion of such a creature hiding near well-populated and hunted areas seems unlikely. Not impossible, of course, but I think we're more likely to find a saquatch or yeti.
If we found something interesting it would attract more investment. People would be more interested in conserving it.
That can't help but make me skeptical -- these people have a compelling reason to hype these reports in order to encourage conservation and protection of the area.
It would be pretty interesting if it's true, however -- my guess would be that a large animal capable of avoiding detection for so long in well-explored areas would be interestingly intelligent...
I don't think that there are many people who are opposed to grabbing stuff for free if they think they can get away with it.
This doesn't make sense. This means that if you are a terrible artist you get to keep your monopoly forever, but if you are brilliant the benefit you gain from your work is limited to whatever is deemed "reasonable profit." Personally, I have no problem throwing my money onto the mammoth pile of money already earned by some of my favorite artists, because I enjoy their work and it's worth something to me. Who is to say that a gifted artist shouldn't be wealthy?
Life is beautiful.
I wasn't comparing them with the "average person on the outside..." but the average person that I know, which is a very different set. Among people with whom I went to school, there are many lawyers, doctors, business types, consultants, as well as plenty of code monkeys and cubicle fillers of various sorts. (Compared to that bunch, researchers are at the low end of the income scale, and junior professors are bringing up the rear.) I have no idea what the numbers are for the populace at large.
I guess it depends on what your criteria for "great/notable work" is...
I've visited and/or have friends and former colleagues at many top universities and research labs. Compared to people I know from "outside", they are markedly more likely to be happily married (or be in very stable long-term relationships) and somewhat more likely to have kids -- and they've done interesting and important work while in this state.
Maybe solitary loaners excell in other fields, but building big systems is a team activity and people skills are important.
Ok for some people, I guess. I've got a family I enjoy spending time with...
Or, in other terms, decided that it was cheaper to pay SCO a little money to ensure that SCO wouldn't bother them or their customers again. It certainly was a lot less expensive than the strategy that IBM is pursuing, for example.
2) Sold their soul to the devil (Microsoft) in return for temporary bankrucpy prevention.
Or, in other terms, took Microsoft to court, made our case, and in the end Microsoft decided it would be in their best interest to settle.
Plus, that part about "bankrupcy prevention" -- take a look at the balance sheet. While Sun certainly isn't raking in the money right now, they're not exactly teetering on the brink of chapter 11 either.
That's not the way I remember it at all... Could provide a link or a little more detail?
Also CTSS is considered the father of Multics which in turn begat Unix.
That's sort of like saying that DOS is the father of Windows. Multics was a ground-up design to create an operating using lessons learned from CTSS (among others). One of those lessons was that they didn't want to it to be much like CTSS, IIRC.
The jump from MULTICS to UNIX was, again, a leap. UNIX doesn't share any code with Multics -- it borrowed some ideas, threw away many others, and added some that were new. This isn't quite what "begat" means.