There was a time when Tcl/Tk was the least excruciating way of making a simple GUI application on Unix. Once decent toolkits (and, eventually, excellent toolkits) became available, Tcl's main selling point was lost. That sounds like it's right on the money, actually. Now that we have Gnome/GTK, wxWidgets and KDE/QT bindings for Python, Perl, Ruby and a slew of other scripting languages, the easiest way to make a simple GUI application is with PyGTK;) (Heh! Just a little humor for you Perl/Ruby/Qt/KDE/wxWidgets/etc. people)
John Ousterhout used to work for Sun and they had a golden opportunity to push Tcl a bit more and integrate it with Java... but they never did much with Tcl and he eventually left. It's a shame, because I rather liked Tcl with its absurdly minimal syntax. Aside from a few niches (mostly, strangely enough, in the realm of scientific computing), Tcl never quite became very mainstream. Sure, it sits quietly on almost every Linux and BSD distro, and sure there are a few things here and there written Tcl or Tcl/Tk, and almost every seasoned Unix developer knows at least a bit of Tcl, the mainstream audience has been eaten by Python and Perl, for the most part. Probably something to do with that 'absurdly minimal syntax', though I guess that still doesn't explain Perl.;)
Of course the stock has dropped 40% in the past couple months, so perhaps that's why he is bitter. This probably has more to do with current trends in the stock market itself than with anything related to Apple itself. In a declining market, tech stocks tend to drop fast.
It's probably not about Premier Elections Systems. The companies United Tech are all aerospace and defense contractor. Diebold sells a lot of security systems products and services. It's probably more about that than about the election machines.
*slurp* What are these? What is this "bed" you speak of? What is this "sleep" everyone here keeps talking about? *slurp* And you do this when? At night? *slurp* Shouldn't you guys be doing something productive?
In other news, pirates have created a crack to prevent news from 4th March 2007 appearing a year later on/. So the $64K question is -- why in the bloody hell haven't that implemented it then?
And animals and plants and... uhhh... well, there's a WHOLE lot of stuff on this planet that consists primarily of carbon. Except you. We're pretty sure you came from another planet, though.
It's not his area of responsibility directly or indirectly. Wrong branch. The "War on Blogs" is the Army, while this guy is in the Air Force. I mean no offense, but really, the separate branches of military have very little to do with each other.
Free and Open Source Software is NOT a religion for me. Notice I didn't use the 'Free Software' moniker or the name 'GNU/Linux' spread by the Disciples of Stallman. Not that I entirely disagree with RMS or the FSF on many principles, but I see the Free and Open Source movements as complimentary -- together they are pushing for what it is important engineering-wise (the "knowledge of the masses" or ESR's Bazaar concept from CatB), as well what is important technology policy wise -- the use of truly open standards, APIs, specifications and source code so that this technology we're creating can outlive us and successive generations. Technology needs to be transparent because no matter how you look at it, companies like Microsoft will not be here forever. Unfortunately, we're treating out data as if they will be. This is a mistake that costs industries billions every year.
I'm a practical guy. I use what works. But I also believe that monopolistic vendor lock-in practices are undercutting society and stifling the growth of technology. It's time for these practices be put to an end. Q.E.D.
Oh, look! It's Sam Ramji, showing he knows nothing about open source principles.
Modular architectures You can find these wherever you see participation at scale - and often a rearchitecture to a more modular system precedes expanded participation. Great examples of this are Firefox, OpenOffice, and X11 - from both the historical rearchitecture and the increased participation that resulted. The Apache HTTP server and APR are good examples that have been modular for as long as I can recall. OpenOffice? Modular? Maybe OOo is developed in a modular way, but the end result is hardly anything but modular. In fact, it's quite monolithic -- when you start OpenOffice Writer, you also start OpenOffice Calc, Base, Draw, Impress, etc.
Programming language agnostic A given project uses a consistent language, but there are no rules on what languages are in scope or out of scope. Being open to more languages means opportunity to attract more developers - the diversity of PHP/Perl/Python/Java has been a core driver in the success of a number of projects including Linux. Open source projects are 'programming language agnostic' because they used public, published and open interfaces. They follow standards. The reason a the Linux kernel build process can be a mixture of bash, Python, Perl, awk, etc. is that all of these things can connect together using pipes and whatnot. The reason you can write GNOME applications in almost any programming language is that the APIs are completely open. The reason why AbiWord and KWord can read Open Document Text files is that that spec is completely open and free of royalties, patents, etc.
Feedback-driven development The "power user" as product manager is a powerful shift in how to build and tune software - and this class of users includes developers who are not committing code back, but instead submitting CRs and defects - resulting in a product that better fits its end users. Huh? How are CRs the same as accepting code patches? Open Source development differs in that these "power users" as he calls them can make their own changes and, if necessary, fork off their project to offer a competing or even a completely different project.
Built-for-purpose systems frequently seen in applications of Linux, the ability to build a system that has just what is needed to fulfill its role and nothing else (think of highly customizable distributions like Gentoo or BusyBox, as well as fully custom deployments). Uhhhh....BusyBox is not a "distribution" and cannot really be compared to Gentoo except that, yes, the program (as in single program, hence, not a distribution) is cutomizable through the use of custom build options.
Sysadmins who write code ability of a skilled system administrator to write the "last mile" code means that they can make a technology work in their particular environment efficiently and often provide good feedback to developers. This is so fundamental to Unix and Linux environments that most sysadmins are competent programmers. Unix sysadmins are generally NOT competent programmers. We're lazy schmucks who whip up quick-and-dirty scripts to accomplish tedious and boring tasks out of sheer laziness. And then we call it 'enhancing productivity' in an attempt to get a raise.:)
Standards-based communication Whether the standard is something from the IETF or W3C, or simply the implementation code itself, where these are used projects are more successful (think of Asterisk and IAX2) and attract a larger ecosystem of software around them. Real open standards are developed by the community at large through agreement, not by a monopoly who can change the "standard" at anytime without notice.
Not only because companies will madly lobby to destroy any attempt to do so Actually, I think many of the biggest companies actually would be in favor of abolishing software patents at this point. Many patents are filed for an attained simply to use as ammunition in case a company gets legally attacked by competitors. It's kind of like nuclear weapons. What we have is mutually assured destruction -- okay, you sue me, so I'm now gonna sue you. Patent trolls exist precisely because they can't be countersued for patent infringement -- they have no product, so they can't possibly be countersued for patent infringement.
The issue with Microsoft was not really about the API. It was about the integration. According to Microsoft you couldn't rip out IE and still have a functioning Windows. I can happily delete Safari and it affects nothing.
While there are integration issues, there really have been many API issues with Microsoft. One example is that back in Windows 2.x and 3.x days, Microsoft Word (and other applications) used an undocumented Windows API that allowed for background printing. This was a real issue back then because Windows itself had no apparent, documented support for it. And it's one reason why other office suites never were able to compete well with Microsoft Office. Word could do background printing, but WordPerfect for Windows, and (Lotus) AmiPro couldn't, at least not until Microsoft eventually exposed those APIs -- well after Office had already gained a dominant market position, though.
I've had the same argument with various people over and over -- the bottom line is that the most efficient solution is always the best for the economy, no matter how many workers don't have jobs. In the end, the workers will have jobs anyway -- they'll just be doing it where no more-efficient solution exists or is possible or they'll get some new skills and/or move on to positions where greater demand exists. Although, one caveat here: cheaper is not always more efficient. Sending IT jobs to India may not be the most efficient solution possible, even though it will be cheaper at least for the short term. (In the long term, standards of living are improving in India and China as a direct result of outsourcing there, so the workers there are now demanding more money. Hence, there is no efficiency to really be gained, it's all an illusion.)
as far as I'm aware, the military has no way to know what you're thinking Don't be sure. And quit daydreaming about Lindsay Lohan, she's way out of your league and she's a drug addict anyway.
Erm, well, one of the things they say relates to the documents being "stolen and forged". Then, in the very same paragraph, they refer to the documents as "private" and "confidential".
Sorry, but, um, forged documents aren't private or confidential unless they contain some degree of accurate information, I suppose...but then they're not subject to banking laws because they're fake documents, right?
So, which is it, Julius Baer? Are these documents forgeries, or are they real documents and therefore subject to banking privacy laws? You don't get to have your cake and eat it, too.
If JB lawyers really had the aim to stop the publication of the documents, they could have just sent WikiLeaks a C&D, who maybe would have even taken it down. But instead, they call up WikiLeaks asking them who their lawyer is and refuse to identify themselves. Who do these people think they are? The fscking Mafia? Wait, don't answer that...:-D
Maybe it's a typo -- "runs like a chimp" brings to mind knuckle dragging with occasional inexplicable detours into incoherent bursts of rage and feces flinging. No, no, that's Ximian Desktop that runs like a chimp. He probably means runs like a chump.
Hey mods: "Redundant", "Offtopic", or "Overrated" do not mean "-1, I don't agree with you." If you disagree with me, then POST and SAY SO. More importantly, state your reasons why. This is how ADULTS converse. Don't mod me down because it helps you deal with your miserable little existance in your mom's basement and your anger issues towards everyone who disagrees with you.
I'm more interested in posts that DISAGREE with me than I am in posts that agree with me. Sometimes a different viewpoint will offer fresh insights.
UFS+SU is still much, much faster than any Linux filesystem in real world usage. Plus moving a huge amount of data does not lock other disk-accessing processes, doing "chmod -R.." on a huge tree IME is incomparably quicker on FreeBSD (like 5-10 seconds on FreeBSD whereas on the very similar tree it virtually died for 15+ minutes on RHEL/Ext3), etc. Then you haven't tried all Linux filesystems in real world usage. ext3 sucks ass in terms of performance, but is compatible with a wider variety of tools. ReiserFS or XFS are much, much quicker. IBM JFS performance is pretty good, too, and is rock-solid stable. For absolutely fast performance, use ext2, which IME is comparable to UFS in terms of performance.
I don't have much experience with the performance aspects of UFS on BSD, but, presumably UFS on Solaris or HP-UX is pretty much the same, and I have to say that IME, XFS is quicker.
Server and, more importantly, the software and services needed to get a destination site up and running -- Sun has the tools and Web/J2EE developers available for hire necessary to get a project like this up and running.
Why have 1 person driving a backhoe when you could employ 20 with shovels? Because the 1 person driving a backhoe, even though he is a skilled worker (trained to run a backhoe), is much, much faster and cheaper than 20 unskilled people with shovels.
Let's say the backhoe worker makes $20/hr + benefits. You can figure his rate to be somewhere around $40 an hour (liberal estimate) when you figure in benefits. Lets say the time difference using a backhoe vs. 20 people with shovels is roughly 2:1 -- a very conservative estimate -- so if it takes 2 weeks with shovels, the backhoe operator gets it done in a week.
Let's say the unskilled workers make $8/hr a piece, no benefits. They end up costing somewhere around $12/hr a piece once you figure in FICA match and so forth, but we'll even pretend they're working under the table for cash. So 20 workers * 80 hours == 1600 man-hours. So take those 1600 man-hours and * 8/hr and you get $12,800 to employ those workers to do your digging.
The skilled guy costs $40/hr and he takes 40 hours. You only have one guy, so that's 40 man-hours * 40 = $1600. Even if the backhoe costs $1,000 a day to run (it doesn't), you still came out ahead by $280 (assuming a 5-day work week).
I can hear the objections already -- but, you didn't figure in the cost of the backhoe! You're right, but the backhoe is a capitalized expense, which means it can be written off. You can do this either once, or you can ammortize the cost over the life of the backhoe. Which means, in essence, the backhoe costs almost nothing. I can't do the same with payroll costs -- they eat into my bottom line AND don't do anything appreciable for my taxes. Plus, there are tons of "hidden" costs with employees -- theft, lost productivity, workers comp claims, etc. The backhoe, by comparison, doesn't usually require additional capital expense. And if it does -- well, it's a capital expense and therefore can be written off!
It's important to remember that business exist to make money, not to employ people.
(Mods: this is an old story now, but feel free to mod me down if you like)
At the east end of the Mall is the is the Lincoln Memorial. At the far west end of the Mall is the Capitol Building.
IIRC, the White House and, as you point out, the Jefferson and Washington Memorials (which are to the south, WH to the north) sit on the east end of the National Mall, slightly west of WWII Memorial, which is straight across the Reflecting Pool from the Lincoln Memorial, just to the West. But about 2/3rds of the lateral distance of the Mall separates the White House Washington Memorial Jefferson Memorial North-South line from the Capitol Building. So, basically, the White House and the Capitol Building are on opposite ends of the Mall (which, as you can see from the map, runs longer East-West than it does North-South)
Linux has had journaling file systems for years. In fact, it has excellent support for multiple journalled file systems -- XFS, ReiserFS, ext3, and JFS. FreeBSD is just now getting around to supporting journalled file systems. ZFS support has been available in FUSE for quite a while now and I believe is more fully featured than what is found in FreeBSD 7. Linux has also had support for SCTP for quite a while as well. Linux has support for lots more hardware, too.
So, you take your tradeoffs -- do you want cutting edge desktop features or are you more concerned with stability? If stability is the name of the game, then of course you want something as stodgy as FreeBSD. Otherwise, if you're willing to live with the occasional odd program that needs to be recompiled with the new kernel or the occasional kernel bug that pops up, then use Linux.
It's also about your requirements. That's why we have freedom of choice.
Slashdot Mirror
Hmmmm...I wonder how much the domain squatter wants for 'pentagon.com'.
It's probably not about Premier Elections Systems. The companies United Tech are all aerospace and defense contractor. Diebold sells a lot of security systems products and services. It's probably more about that than about the election machines.
*slurp* What are these? What is this "bed" you speak of? What is this "sleep" everyone here keeps talking about? *slurp* And you do this when? At night? *slurp* Shouldn't you guys be doing something productive?
*slurp*
Mmmmmm....coffee!
*slurp*
And animals and plants and
It's not his area of responsibility directly or indirectly. Wrong branch. The "War on Blogs" is the Army, while this guy is in the Air Force. I mean no offense, but really, the separate branches of military have very little to do with each other.
Free and Open Source Software is NOT a religion for me. Notice I didn't use the 'Free Software' moniker or the name 'GNU/Linux' spread by the Disciples of Stallman. Not that I entirely disagree with RMS or the FSF on many principles, but I see the Free and Open Source movements as complimentary -- together they are pushing for what it is important engineering-wise (the "knowledge of the masses" or ESR's Bazaar concept from CatB), as well what is important technology policy wise -- the use of truly open standards, APIs, specifications and source code so that this technology we're creating can outlive us and successive generations. Technology needs to be transparent because no matter how you look at it, companies like Microsoft will not be here forever. Unfortunately, we're treating out data as if they will be. This is a mistake that costs industries billions every year.
I'm a practical guy. I use what works. But I also believe that monopolistic vendor lock-in practices are undercutting society and stifling the growth of technology. It's time for these practices be put to an end. Q.E.D.
You can find these wherever you see participation at scale - and often a rearchitecture to a more modular system precedes expanded participation. Great examples of this are Firefox, OpenOffice, and X11 - from both the historical rearchitecture and the increased participation that resulted. The Apache HTTP server and APR are good examples that have been modular for as long as I can recall. OpenOffice? Modular? Maybe OOo is developed in a modular way, but the end result is hardly anything but modular. In fact, it's quite monolithic -- when you start OpenOffice Writer, you also start OpenOffice Calc, Base, Draw, Impress, etc. Programming language agnostic
A given project uses a consistent language, but there are no rules on what languages are in scope or out of scope. Being open to more languages means opportunity to attract more developers - the diversity of PHP/Perl/Python/Java has been a core driver in the success of a number of projects including Linux. Open source projects are 'programming language agnostic' because they used public, published and open interfaces. They follow standards. The reason a the Linux kernel build process can be a mixture of bash, Python, Perl, awk, etc. is that all of these things can connect together using pipes and whatnot. The reason you can write GNOME applications in almost any programming language is that the APIs are completely open. The reason why AbiWord and KWord can read Open Document Text files is that that spec is completely open and free of royalties, patents, etc. Feedback-driven development
The "power user" as product manager is a powerful shift in how to build and tune software - and this class of users includes developers who are not committing code back, but instead submitting CRs and defects - resulting in a product that better fits its end users. Huh? How are CRs the same as accepting code patches? Open Source development differs in that these "power users" as he calls them can make their own changes and, if necessary, fork off their project to offer a competing or even a completely different project. Built-for-purpose systems
frequently seen in applications of Linux, the ability to build a system that has just what is needed to fulfill its role and nothing else (think of highly customizable distributions like Gentoo or BusyBox, as well as fully custom deployments). Uhhhh....BusyBox is not a "distribution" and cannot really be compared to Gentoo except that, yes, the program (as in single program, hence, not a distribution) is cutomizable through the use of custom build options. Sysadmins who write code
ability of a skilled system administrator to write the "last mile" code means that they can make a technology work in their particular environment efficiently and often provide good feedback to developers. This is so fundamental to Unix and Linux environments that most sysadmins are competent programmers. Unix sysadmins are generally NOT competent programmers. We're lazy schmucks who whip up quick-and-dirty scripts to accomplish tedious and boring tasks out of sheer laziness. And then we call it 'enhancing productivity' in an attempt to get a raise.
Whether the standard is something from the IETF or W3C, or simply the implementation code itself, where these are used projects are more successful (think of Asterisk and IAX2) and attract a larger ecosystem of software around them. Real open standards are developed by the community at large through agreement, not by a monopoly who can change the "standard" at anytime without notice.
While there are integration issues, there really have been many API issues with Microsoft. One example is that back in Windows 2.x and 3.x days, Microsoft Word (and other applications) used an undocumented Windows API that allowed for background printing. This was a real issue back then because Windows itself had no apparent, documented support for it. And it's one reason why other office suites never were able to compete well with Microsoft Office. Word could do background printing, but WordPerfect for Windows, and (Lotus) AmiPro couldn't, at least not until Microsoft eventually exposed those APIs -- well after Office had already gained a dominant market position, though.
I've had the same argument with various people over and over -- the bottom line is that the most efficient solution is always the best for the economy, no matter how many workers don't have jobs. In the end, the workers will have jobs anyway -- they'll just be doing it where no more-efficient solution exists or is possible or they'll get some new skills and/or move on to positions where greater demand exists. Although, one caveat here: cheaper is not always more efficient. Sending IT jobs to India may not be the most efficient solution possible, even though it will be cheaper at least for the short term. (In the long term, standards of living are improving in India and China as a direct result of outsourcing there, so the workers there are now demanding more money. Hence, there is no efficiency to really be gained, it's all an illusion.)
Thanks,
The U.S. Military
Erm, well, one of the things they say relates to the documents being "stolen and forged". Then, in the very same paragraph, they refer to the documents as "private" and "confidential".
... :-D
Sorry, but, um, forged documents aren't private or confidential unless they contain some degree of accurate information, I suppose...but then they're not subject to banking laws because they're fake documents, right?
So, which is it, Julius Baer? Are these documents forgeries, or are they real documents and therefore subject to banking privacy laws? You don't get to have your cake and eat it, too.
If JB lawyers really had the aim to stop the publication of the documents, they could have just sent WikiLeaks a C&D, who maybe would have even taken it down. But instead, they call up WikiLeaks asking them who their lawyer is and refuse to identify themselves. Who do these people think they are? The fscking Mafia? Wait, don't answer that
Hey mods: "Redundant", "Offtopic", or "Overrated" do not mean "-1, I don't agree with you." If you disagree with me, then POST and SAY SO. More importantly, state your reasons why. This is how ADULTS converse. Don't mod me down because it helps you deal with your miserable little existance in your mom's basement and your anger issues towards everyone who disagrees with you.
I'm more interested in posts that DISAGREE with me than I am in posts that agree with me. Sometimes a different viewpoint will offer fresh insights.
I don't have much experience with the performance aspects of UFS on BSD, but, presumably UFS on Solaris or HP-UX is pretty much the same, and I have to say that IME, XFS is quicker.
Server and, more importantly, the software and services needed to get a destination site up and running -- Sun has the tools and Web/J2EE developers available for hire necessary to get a project like this up and running.
Let's say the backhoe worker makes $20/hr + benefits. You can figure his rate to be somewhere around $40 an hour (liberal estimate) when you figure in benefits. Lets say the time difference using a backhoe vs. 20 people with shovels is roughly 2:1 -- a very conservative estimate -- so if it takes 2 weeks with shovels, the backhoe operator gets it done in a week.
Let's say the unskilled workers make $8/hr a piece, no benefits. They end up costing somewhere around $12/hr a piece once you figure in FICA match and so forth, but we'll even pretend they're working under the table for cash. So 20 workers * 80 hours == 1600 man-hours. So take those 1600 man-hours and * 8/hr and you get $12,800 to employ those workers to do your digging.
The skilled guy costs $40/hr and he takes 40 hours. You only have one guy, so that's 40 man-hours * 40 = $1600. Even if the backhoe costs $1,000 a day to run (it doesn't), you still came out ahead by $280 (assuming a 5-day work week).
I can hear the objections already -- but, you didn't figure in the cost of the backhoe! You're right, but the backhoe is a capitalized expense, which means it can be written off. You can do this either once, or you can ammortize the cost over the life of the backhoe. Which means, in essence, the backhoe costs almost nothing. I can't do the same with payroll costs -- they eat into my bottom line AND don't do anything appreciable for my taxes. Plus, there are tons of "hidden" costs with employees -- theft, lost productivity, workers comp claims, etc. The backhoe, by comparison, doesn't usually require additional capital expense. And if it does -- well, it's a capital expense and therefore can be written off!
It's important to remember that business exist to make money, not to employ people.
(Mods: this is an old story now, but feel free to mod me down if you like)
Don't be so literally minded. Sheesh.
At the east end of the Mall is the is the Lincoln Memorial. At the far west end of the Mall is the Capitol Building.
IIRC, the White House and, as you point out, the Jefferson and Washington Memorials (which are to the south, WH to the north) sit on the east end of the National Mall, slightly west of WWII Memorial, which is straight across the Reflecting Pool from the Lincoln Memorial, just to the West. But about 2/3rds of the lateral distance of the Mall separates the White House Washington Memorial Jefferson Memorial North-South line from the Capitol Building. So, basically, the White House and the Capitol Building are on opposite ends of the Mall (which, as you can see from the map, runs longer East-West than it does North-South)
Well, in Korea, only old people fly spaceships.
Wait...why is it that I can see a spaceship, flying down the left lane at well below the speed limit with its left blinker on the whole way?
Yeah, last time I was in Washington, I saw a few. One of them is at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. and the other one is on the opposite end of the Mall.
Yeah, but OTOH --
Linux has had journaling file systems for years. In fact, it has excellent support for multiple journalled file systems -- XFS, ReiserFS, ext3, and JFS. FreeBSD is just now getting around to supporting journalled file systems. ZFS support has been available in FUSE for quite a while now and I believe is more fully featured than what is found in FreeBSD 7. Linux has also had support for SCTP for quite a while as well. Linux has support for lots more hardware, too.
So, you take your tradeoffs -- do you want cutting edge desktop features or are you more concerned with stability? If stability is the name of the game, then of course you want something as stodgy as FreeBSD. Otherwise, if you're willing to live with the occasional odd program that needs to be recompiled with the new kernel or the occasional kernel bug that pops up, then use Linux.
It's also about your requirements. That's why we have freedom of choice.