Pardon my ignorance, but once you have a ruling against them, what recourse do you then have for getting that ruling enforced? Getting the ruling doesn't seem like the "end" of the process. What comes next? I figure some sort of law enforcement has to get involved to see to it that the ruling is enforced. If the losing defendant is in another state, what jurisdiction does your local small claims court have over that state's law enforcement? And if the answer to that is "none", how can the local law enforcement that your local judge does have control over have any jurisdiction in that other state?
Again, please excuse my ignorance - I just am having trouble connecting the dots all the way to "getting my money back."
This isn't meant as a flame, since I agree with your general idea of taking a new look to see what's improved. But if the parent meant what I think he meant, then I think "rpm" and "apt-get" can be compared. Back when I used a.rpm based distro, I was routinely typing "rpm -Uvh," this and "rpm -e," that. This was before "yum" and some of the others were mainstream. A.rpm format can be compared to a.deb format - that I'll agree with.
But my other annoyance with rpm (whether it was the tool or the format or both at fault - I'm not sure) was handling major upgrades. And this has been written about plenty online, so I won't start a war. But for me, it was enough of an annoyance to have me try a.deb based distro and I have yet to look back. Today I'm using Ubuntu, and just last week I did a full upgrade from Hoary to Breezy in one swift stroke. I was never able to do that with RedHat or with Mandrake or any other.rpm based distro I was using. I always had to backup all my important pieces of data laying about, do a clean re-install, and then rebuild my world.
Has rpm et. al. improved to the point of eliminating these annoyances? Last I checked (and admittedly it's been a couple of years or so) they hadn't. Let me know if I'm mistaken, and if so I very well might take a new look at Fedora or Mandriva or Suse/Novell.
In a vain attempt to stay somewhat on topic here, let me just say that I was a big RedHat user for years, going back to release 4 or so. I remember reading articles about Bob and the other RedHat starters and having a lot of respect for what they were building. I remember watching as they IPO'd. And for some people indeed RedHat == Linux. It's the brand they've built that's so strong. It's the same reason that for some, Cuisinart == Food Processor, or Frigidaire == Refrigerator, or Coke == soda pop.
IANARocketScientist, and for those other readers who aren't can someone please explain:
Why don't they have ISS in a higher orbit that won't decay as fast/often? And again, pardon my ignorance, but my (un)common sense tells me if they are at a high enough orbit, it shouldn't decay as readily - too high and you have the opposite problem of drifting farther away from Earth.
In other words, rather than having to make orbit adjustments so often, isn't it possible to push it to a high enough orbit that won't require a tweak for a longer period of time?
I haven't read the rest of the thread this goes with, but I just wanted to comment on what you wrote above. I totally agree with you about aptitude - or lack thereof - among some who call themselves "programmers." But I think it's important to remember the massive breadth that "programming" includes. A high-level database guru likely has no need to know the secret garden of assembler, for example. So it becomes critical to be certain about which aptitude "sector" you are trying to test.
Secondly, the aptitude test itself. Personally, I don't write code with pen and paper. I use a text editor and QWERTY-style keyboard. If you were to administer a programming aptitude test in an environment I'm more familiar with, I'll probably do pretty well. But I've been in that interview where I'm asked to write an algorithm in C on the whiteboard, and it was far more difficult. I can't move lines of code around and refactor on-the-fly (which happens to be my style of code writing) the way I can with an editor. That environmental difference may have caused an imprecise measurement of my aptitude for the interviewer. I guess I'd just like to see code tests administered at a terminal - maybe with the proctor sitting alongside to watch, XP-style.
One final anecdote: I worked in a QA group and a fellow engineer would insist on including a challenging "aptitude test" for interviewing candidates. If a resume had a particular routing protocol listed, he would expect deep knowledge about every bit of every field in that protocol header. To me (and to most of the candidates) this seemed a bit senseless. The header fields are available for reference on the protocol poster, or decoded for you in the packet sniffer. There's really little advantage to have them committed to memory. It's the higher-level protocol operations - perhaps timeouts and their consequences - that had more importance for that particular job. So even though he was testing their aptitude for a certain knowledge sector, it was the wrong one for the job we were trying to fill.
I agree with that piece of advice. My box is only about 3" above the carpet on the lower shelf of the desk here, and there's no shortage of dust bunnies _under_ that shelf. But after running continually for over a year, I found very little crud inside when I installed a new drive earlier this week.
Contrary to what other posters have said, I have more fans blowing out than in. I've got a 3" fan on the side, and one in the back - they're both blowing out. Then the PS has a larger diameter fan blowing in (and down). So far so good - maybe it's dumb luck.
The general consensus that I'm aware of is that if you can give proof that you are indeed the individual requesting access on your own behalf (perhaps through biometrics), if you can prove you have knowledge of some piece of secret data (a password), and finally if you also have in your possession some item or object required to gain access (like the token you mentioned), then the system can be reasonably sure you're legit. Thwarting all of these simultaneously would be quite difficult.
If you purchase a printed book, and it gets tragically consumed in a fire, are you entitled to a fresh copy from the store?
If years go by and the pages are eaten through by worms or something, are you owed a new printing?
And if when one of these or some other tragic end comes to your paper-bound tome, only you find that nobody prints new copies of it anymore, what then?
Consider: 1. How different is a house fire from a disk head crash? 2. How different is worm rot compared to bit rot, protocol rot, or format rot?
The answer to question 1 is insurance. I can insure physical belongings, and (hopefully) get compensated for their worth if something happens to them. Is anybody willing to insure data as if it were a tangible object?
The answer to question 2 is time. Worm rot takes incredibly long - perhaps longer than my own life. Bit/protocol/format rot could take only months. It's likely that I should expect to have access to what I've paid for at least for the duration of my own existence.
My opinion: You can't take the old perspectives as applied to physical items and try to apply them directly and absolutely to bits of data. DRM as it's being done today isn't fair to the buyer. Violating it, arguably, may not be fair to the seller. Somebody out there needs to think of a better way of applying capitalist economics to data-goods in a way that's fair to both sides.
I don't know jack about Dvorak, but I'm wondering how effective different keyboard layouts are when you figure in things like keystrokes (Ctrl-C, Ctrl-V, etc.) and also when considering the h-j-k-l cursor movement keys in vi and others. Does it become optimal to reassign such keys in these applications? Does anyone have experience or opinions on this?
Saying people are "addicted" to email because they check it 3-5 times a day is like saying people are "addicted" to the phone because they choose to answer it every time it rings. Or for that matter, checking your snail-mail box once a day (you ADDICT!). Oh, I check my wristwatch a few times a day to see what time it is - does this make me a TIME addict?
Love for a project, not releasing products in a timely fashion is what makes open-source different, and much appreciated.
Sorry, but I don't think this is true in all cases. I cite the recent negativity against Debian and the lack of a recent release. They're now reacting to that negativity and getting Sarge out the door.
Time to market - while not the ONLY thing - is still important. Whether it's FOSS or not.
I'm curious. Anybody know what vendor(s) they are using for all this? One might assume Cisco, but one might also assume they aren't foolish enough to fall into a single vendor lock-in.
Slashdot Mirror
Pardon my ignorance, but once you have a ruling against them, what recourse do you then have for getting that ruling enforced? Getting the ruling doesn't seem like the "end" of the process. What comes next? I figure some sort of law enforcement has to get involved to see to it that the ruling is enforced. If the losing defendant is in another state, what jurisdiction does your local small claims court have over that state's law enforcement? And if the answer to that is "none", how can the local law enforcement that your local judge does have control over have any jurisdiction in that other state?
Again, please excuse my ignorance - I just am having trouble connecting the dots all the way to "getting my money back."
This isn't meant as a flame, since I agree with your general idea of taking a new look to see what's improved. But if the parent meant what I think he meant, then I think "rpm" and "apt-get" can be compared. Back when I used a .rpm based distro, I was routinely typing "rpm -Uvh," this and "rpm -e," that. This was before "yum" and some of the others were mainstream. A .rpm format can be compared to a .deb format - that I'll agree with.
.deb based distro and I have yet to look back. Today I'm using Ubuntu, and just last week I did a full upgrade from Hoary to Breezy in one swift stroke. I was never able to do that with RedHat or with Mandrake or any other .rpm based distro I was using. I always had to backup all my important pieces of data laying about, do a clean re-install, and then rebuild my world.
But my other annoyance with rpm (whether it was the tool or the format or both at fault - I'm not sure) was handling major upgrades. And this has been written about plenty online, so I won't start a war. But for me, it was enough of an annoyance to have me try a
Has rpm et. al. improved to the point of eliminating these annoyances? Last I checked (and admittedly it's been a couple of years or so) they hadn't. Let me know if I'm mistaken, and if so I very well might take a new look at Fedora or Mandriva or Suse/Novell.
In a vain attempt to stay somewhat on topic here, let me just say that I was a big RedHat user for years, going back to release 4 or so. I remember reading articles about Bob and the other RedHat starters and having a lot of respect for what they were building. I remember watching as they IPO'd. And for some people indeed RedHat == Linux. It's the brand they've built that's so strong. It's the same reason that for some, Cuisinart == Food Processor, or Frigidaire == Refrigerator, or Coke == soda pop.
IANARocketScientist, and for those other readers who aren't can someone please explain:
Why don't they have ISS in a higher orbit that won't decay as fast/often? And again, pardon my ignorance, but my (un)common sense tells me if they are at a high enough orbit, it shouldn't decay as readily - too high and you have the opposite problem of drifting farther away from Earth.
In other words, rather than having to make orbit adjustments so often, isn't it possible to push it to a high enough orbit that won't require a tweak for a longer period of time?
TIA for n00b-enlightenment.
(Un)official release song and dance here
(Warning: Flash animation)
You keep saying that word.
I do not think it means what you think it means.
I haven't read the rest of the thread this goes with, but I just wanted to comment on what you wrote above. I totally agree with you about aptitude - or lack thereof - among some who call themselves "programmers." But I think it's important to remember the massive breadth that "programming" includes. A high-level database guru likely has no need to know the secret garden of assembler, for example. So it becomes critical to be certain about which aptitude "sector" you are trying to test.
Secondly, the aptitude test itself. Personally, I don't write code with pen and paper. I use a text editor and QWERTY-style keyboard. If you were to administer a programming aptitude test in an environment I'm more familiar with, I'll probably do pretty well. But I've been in that interview where I'm asked to write an algorithm in C on the whiteboard, and it was far more difficult. I can't move lines of code around and refactor on-the-fly (which happens to be my style of code writing) the way I can with an editor. That environmental difference may have caused an imprecise measurement of my aptitude for the interviewer. I guess I'd just like to see code tests administered at a terminal - maybe with the proctor sitting alongside to watch, XP-style.
One final anecdote:
I worked in a QA group and a fellow engineer would insist on including a challenging "aptitude test" for interviewing candidates. If a resume had a particular routing protocol listed, he would expect deep knowledge about every bit of every field in that protocol header. To me (and to most of the candidates) this seemed a bit senseless. The header fields are available for reference on the protocol poster, or decoded for you in the packet sniffer. There's really little advantage to have them committed to memory. It's the higher-level protocol operations - perhaps timeouts and their consequences - that had more importance for that particular job. So even though he was testing their aptitude for a certain knowledge sector, it was the wrong one for the job we were trying to fill.
Are you by chance friends with ESR?
I wouldn't worry. This is the whole reason why we have Whacking Day right?
I agree with that piece of advice. My box is only about 3" above the carpet on the lower shelf of the desk here, and there's no shortage of dust bunnies _under_ that shelf. But after running continually for over a year, I found very little crud inside when I installed a new drive earlier this week.
Contrary to what other posters have said, I have more fans blowing out than in. I've got a 3" fan on the side, and one in the back - they're both blowing out. Then the PS has a larger diameter fan blowing in (and down). So far so good - maybe it's dumb luck.
Seems like an accurate headline to me.
1. Who you are
2. What you know
3. What you have
The general consensus that I'm aware of is that if you can give proof that you are indeed the individual requesting access on your own behalf (perhaps through biometrics), if you can prove you have knowledge of some piece of secret data (a password), and finally if you also have in your possession some item or object required to gain access (like the token you mentioned), then the system can be reasonably sure you're legit. Thwarting all of these simultaneously would be quite difficult.
And what about the new MEGA m&m's? How many can fit on one of those bad boys? And will there be a MEGA Peanut m&m? And what will be in it - a coconut?
Peer Review.
I submit this as possible evidence to the contrary.
"Software registering these libraries as dependencies: (None Registered)"
Shocker!
:-)
*grin* (This post is meant in jest - I actually enjoyed the commentary very much
Clever Marketing
I for one welcome our new creme-filled-golden-spongecake overlords...
Seems fishy to me.
Why go through this sort of effort to make bigger trout?
Why not just farm-raise fish of a larger species (like catfish)?
Can I get the goverment to make a genetically-altered giant version
of all my other favorite foods too? (e.g. Twinkies)
Is this a good use of our tax dollars?
If you purchase a printed book, and it gets tragically consumed in a fire, are you entitled to a fresh copy from the store?
If years go by and the pages are eaten through by worms or something, are you owed a new printing?
And if when one of these or some other tragic end comes to your paper-bound tome, only you find that nobody prints new copies of it anymore, what then?
Consider:
1. How different is a house fire from a disk head crash?
2. How different is worm rot compared to bit rot, protocol rot, or format rot?
The answer to question 1 is insurance. I can insure physical belongings,
and (hopefully) get compensated for their worth if something happens to them. Is anybody willing to insure data as if it were a tangible object?
The answer to question 2 is time. Worm rot takes incredibly long - perhaps longer than my own life. Bit/protocol/format rot could take only months. It's likely that I should expect to have access to what I've paid for at least for the duration of my own existence.
My opinion:
You can't take the old perspectives as applied to physical items and try to apply them directly and absolutely to bits of data. DRM as it's being done today isn't fair to the buyer. Violating it, arguably, may not be fair to the seller. Somebody out there needs to think of a better way of applying capitalist economics to data-goods in a way that's fair to both sides.
Thankyoudrivethru
You mean this guy wrote a book about computers and mathematics??
I give it pi snaps up and a big ol greek sigma snap...
I don't know jack about Dvorak, but I'm wondering how effective different keyboard layouts are when you figure in things like keystrokes (Ctrl-C, Ctrl-V, etc.) and also when considering the h-j-k-l cursor movement keys in vi and others.
Does it become optimal to reassign such keys in these applications? Does anyone have experience or opinions on this?
Saying people are "addicted" to email because they check it 3-5 times a day is like saying people are "addicted" to the phone because they choose to answer it every time it rings. Or for that matter, checking your snail-mail box once a day (you ADDICT!). Oh, I check my wristwatch a few times a day to see what time it is - does this make me a TIME addict?
I think you meant to say, "Might is a mighty word."
Love for a project, not releasing products in a timely fashion is what
makes open-source different, and much appreciated.
Sorry, but I don't think this is true in all cases. I cite the recent negativity
against Debian and the lack of a recent release. They're now reacting to that
negativity and getting Sarge out the door.
Time to market - while not the ONLY thing - is still important. Whether it's
FOSS or not.
No no...
Flush the cell down the toilet. You know, as a school prank!
(swish, swirl, BOOM!)
I'm curious.
Anybody know what vendor(s) they are using for all this?
One might assume Cisco, but one might also assume they aren't
foolish enough to fall into a single vendor lock-in.