At first glance I read "...a full degree in production looming...". I thought basket weaving had gone industrial.
This can be good news for those of us who are serious computer scientists, as opposed to those who want to learn a little programming and make money quickly.
Of course this invites a lot of humour, but I really think there is a systematic reason. Even if everyone tries their best for the common goal, which is probably rare.
I make a point of putting 2 or 3 seconds of though into where I put stuff. That's enough that I can located it with find/grep. And I clean every now and then, which helps separate the completely useless from the rest. If other people need to incur more overhead and bloat, they are welcome to it. In the long run it won't help most of them.
Open source software is made by a bunch of people who actually want to do the work. Some of it turns out to be good. Perhaps it is not obvious to management types that people can do good work without threat of punishment.
These are not treaties agreed to for the rest of eternity. There are time schedules for every participant who wants to cancel their participation, usually on the order of 6 months or so. And it strikes me that the kind of threat we are considering might be a good reason.
Those are good points. Similar stuff is adressed by a few other good posts - but everyone is assuming the system has databases, a GUI interface etc.
Lots of software has none of those, not even a user interface. You also need things like:
- Design goals: what are the objectives and constraints
- Requirements (can be just references) and how they affect the design
Not entirely. Computer scientists write lots of programs, but it is not directly what they are paid for. Same thing for software engineers. Unless of course they work as programmers, which most of them do.
Exactly. The attitude that contributors to OSS should be advancing the holy mission reminds me of working for a lot of companies: you can't do anything that interests you, it could affect the quarterly profits. OSS should not become just another software manufacturer. People should work on whay they feel is worthwhile, good tools and products will come out of that.
Then you have to redesign. Optimizing the wrong parts based on guessing earlier in the process doesn't help you there either.
The argument for optimizing later aims at detail work, not really at the global architecture. If you work on that, you should profile the global architecture, perhaps in a simulation, before you release it into the wild.
To provide you with better, more personalized articles and comments, about your rights online, please publish your driver licence number, home adress, SSN, bank account numbers, any restrictions on your driver license (e.g. corrective lenses, only drive form/to work,...), slashdot password, and access to other information which we may from time to time require.
It was an honest mistake, the article's poster thought your brother-in-law wass driving there.
Re:Save Voyager!
on
Hope for Hubble
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Yes, for the amount of money spent just talking about whether it's worth saving the Hubble over the next year. Not counting the people on slashdot.
Yes, but that would not be properly scary.
I'm sure the "bugs" in question mostly breed inside sick people. Now, if we could eliminate those from the hospitals, we'd be set.
We started as a small group, probably someplace in Africa, and now we are everywhere on the planet. Even in the worst places, where there really is no reason to go. We will go because we can't stop.
Suppose I develop software for linux, and I want to run it on PPC machines as well. Then the Mac Mini seems like an ok machine, I don't have to buy it in parts. And I don't get any money back if I use the OS that it comes with. Plus, it's such a pretty box.
Re:Have they considered terrorism?
on
Space Elevator Update
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
It seems you are already living in fear. That is a more immediate problem than a space elevator being planned, and it is all too common today. Not just because of terrorism.
Slashdot Mirror
At first glance I read "...a full degree in production looming...". I thought basket weaving had gone industrial.
This can be good news for those of us who are serious computer scientists, as opposed to those who want to learn a little programming and make money quickly.
Of course this invites a lot of humour, but I really think there is a systematic reason. Even if everyone tries their best for the common goal, which is probably rare.
I can aggregate everyone's email now and read it as news? Sure is more interesting than just mine.
I make a point of putting 2 or 3 seconds of though into where I put stuff. That's enough that I can located it with find/grep. And I clean every now and then, which helps separate the completely useless from the rest. If other people need to incur more overhead and bloat, they are welcome to it. In the long run it won't help most of them.
Open source software is made by a bunch of people who actually want to do the work. Some of it turns out to be good. Perhaps it is not obvious to management types that people can do good work without threat of punishment.
These are not treaties agreed to for the rest of eternity. There are time schedules for every participant who wants to cancel their participation, usually on the order of 6 months or so. And it strikes me that the kind of threat we are considering might be a good reason.
Linspire has a nice building, I used to walk past it every day. Bad traffic though in the afternoon.
I would happily test their software for a small fee. Sounds like a great deal.
Those are good points. Similar stuff is adressed by a few other good posts - but everyone is assuming the system has databases, a GUI interface etc.
Lots of software has none of those, not even a user interface. You also need things like:
- Design goals: what are the objectives and constraints
- Requirements (can be just references) and how they affect the design
Not entirely. Computer scientists write lots of programs, but it is not directly what they are paid for. Same thing for software engineers. Unless of course they work as programmers, which most of them do.
Exactly. The attitude that contributors to OSS should be advancing the holy mission reminds me of working for a lot of companies: you can't do anything that interests you, it could affect the quarterly profits. OSS should not become just another software manufacturer. People should work on whay they feel is worthwhile, good tools and products will come out of that.
Then you have to redesign. Optimizing the wrong parts based on guessing earlier in the process doesn't help you there either.
The argument for optimizing later aims at detail work, not really at the global architecture. If you work on that, you should profile the global architecture, perhaps in a simulation, before you release it into the wild.
To provide you with better, more personalized articles and comments, about your rights online, please publish your driver licence number, home adress, SSN, bank account numbers, any restrictions on your driver license (e.g. corrective lenses, only drive form/to work,...), slashdot password, and access to other information which we may from time to time require.
It was an honest mistake, the article's poster thought your brother-in-law wass driving there.
Yes, for the amount of money spent just talking about whether it's worth saving the Hubble over the next year. Not counting the people on slashdot.
Yes, but that would not be properly scary. I'm sure the "bugs" in question mostly breed inside sick people. Now, if we could eliminate those from the hospitals, we'd be set.
What is unethical about seeing what some product does, and thinking "how would I do this?" That is all Tridge is accused of.
We started as a small group, probably someplace in Africa, and now we are everywhere on the planet. Even in the worst places, where there really is no reason to go. We will go because we can't stop.
That describes television in most countries.
Yes I'm aware of that, but I'm strictly after the PPC instruction set. And I will publish the source when it's working :)
Ah yes. Probably I could fit bigger drives in one of those too.
Suppose I develop software for linux, and I want to run it on PPC machines as well. Then the Mac Mini seems like an ok machine, I don't have to buy it in parts. And I don't get any money back if I use the OS that it comes with. Plus, it's such a pretty box.
But what they are saying is important !
It seems you are already living in fear. That is a more immediate problem than a space elevator being planned, and it is all too common today. Not just because of terrorism.
It's 0.4535924, but I don't know how that relates to cost either.
You put a ship underneath it. Or you use dirigibles (blimps, zeppelins) and don't let it touch the surface.