Shoes are used a lot in crimes, too. Perhaps these states would feel it necessary to put radio transmitters in all shoes sold within their jurisdiction, you know, because TERRORISTS and PEDOPHILES!
At least you folks are answering questions. I'll take a wait and see, buff SourceForge was once great, and it would be nice to see regain at least some ground.
I learned to program primarily on Radio Shack machines (MC-10 and Color Computer, boy that brings back memories). I found the GWBASIC/QBasic interpreters fairly close to the old Tandy/RS variants of Microsoft BASIC. The Commodore interpreter, which was also an MS BASIC variant, still seemed to have some oddities.
The problem with gaming was of course that every microcomputer had its own graphics engine, so it made porting incredibly complex in many cases. Since we're talking about computers that had, at most, 30-odd kb in free RAM, there wasn't much room for graphics abstraction. Commodore's graphics, especially on the C64, with its sprite capabilities, made it very different than the rest of the microcomputers of the time.
But text-based stuff was usually pretty easy, and I remember the adventure writing book, which was pretty cool, and I wrote a few adventure games. It actually taught me a lot about string processing, indexes and counters and the like, so these books did teach some pretty important fundamentals in a way that gave you quick results.
You know, you can't just handwave evidence away with "It's a complex system."
If increased CO2 levels are increasing the absorption of solar energy, which you don't seem to deny, then pray tell where the fuck is that energy going, if not into the lower atmosphere and the oceans? Come on, Mr. Smarty Guy, fucking explain how "complex systems" make energy magically fucking disappear. Go on, get to it. Show how "complex systems" somehow allow violations of thermodynamics.
But only if you believe there is such a thing as sexual misconduct. It's pretty clear that on/. the number of posters that think such a thing as "inappropriate behavior" below the level of "unwanted penis insertion" even exists.
What's really fun is to watch morons and psuedoskeptics going around bandying made up statistics and literally denigrating an entire field of research as populated by liars.
Grow the fuck up. The laws of physics don't owe your fucking SUV any favors.
This is more akin to firing the consultant about half way through their analysis, declaring "Yeah, you told us some things were wrong, so we don't need you tell us any more."
Exactly. Just because a theory has been confirmed in a "larger picture" fashion hardly means there's no work left to do. It's not like cosmology is finished because General Relativity has been largely confirmed, or Proto-Indo-European studies is finished just because we know a large number of languages descended from a common ancestral tongue about 5,000 years ago.
I use MS products every bloody day. We upgraded to a Server 2012 network last year, we run Exchange 2010, all our workstations run Windows, with Office on them.
I have to deal with its often inelegant solutions to automation and remote administration (seriously, at one point we had GUI "scripting"). Yes, they've built better tools than they had, but all those tools ever seem to do is demonstrate the old maxim; those that don't understand Unix are doomed to re-implement it badly. Even Powershell is just gawdawful hard to use, and while it's better than the collection vbscript files, batch files, registry files and the like that came before it, I still find the process of Windows scripting just dreadful.
Windows needs Bash and the standard Unix toolkit, badly. Yes, there might be some kludges here and there, but WTF is the registry but just a bunch of setting/value pairs in a hierarchy. We were using text-based tools ten years ago to manipulate it, building registry files or using CLI registry utilities. Binary data was a pain, to be sure, but most of the registry is all just plain text.
And it's not as if Exchange is easy. Yes, there's the brain dead configuration that comes out of the box, but if you want to do anything like advanced filtering it suddenly becomes very complex. We run Exchange 2010 where I work, and a few months ago I wanted to do some scripting on incoming emails to a specific mailbox. Certainly possible, but man oh man, between being forced to work in Powershell and the awkwardness of Exchange itself, I ended up implementing it on the Postfix server that sits between the Exchange server and the network. Postfix passes off the message via STDIO to my Bash script, I pulled out the attachments I need to save elsewhere for further processing, and it's been humming like a charm ever since.
Maybe some of it has to do with the fact that I'm a *nix guy, and it's more familiar terrain, but I really can't get over just difficult Powershell and Exchange can be, where the *nix philosophy just makes things so much easier.
Gosh, what did we ever do before Windows 2000? Authentication by clay tablet?
It's the egocentric nature of MS's claims, that somehow computing couldn't be done without its products, that pisses me off the most. It denies an absolute vast amount of work done in these areas for decades before derivative technologies like AD even existed
Just like how Redmondites are doubtless cheering the innovation of giving Windows admins what everyone else has had for decades. This isn't a moment for pride at Redmond, but the moment when if fully recognizds just how shabbily it treated people stuck trying to do automation on its amazingly incoherent platform.
Well, whenever it appears on Server, and by that I'm assuming our Server 2012 seats won't have it, so what this amounts to is "Shell out a bunch more money in operating systems and CALs, and we'll give you this nifty feature (which every other server grade OS has had for a couple of decades now)
What do you mean no rhyme or reason? The basic toolset; cat, sh, mv, rm, and so forth are mnemonics. The point being to make the commands as short as possible while retaining some semblance of meaning. For me Powershell's absurdly verbose naming scheme is as good a sign as any that Microsoft has never really understood CLI work.
So essentially it took until 2009 for Microsoft to even begin to admit that RPC, a few rather crappy scripting host options and RDP were inadequate, but it took them over six more years to finally implement what is pretty much the gold standard of encrypted TTY interfaces.
Maybe this is part of the turning over a new leaf, but I can't help but imagine that the next version of Microsoft's coursework will announce how innovative all of this, much as it went around declaring how innovative Powershell was, when all it really is is an overly complicated descendant of Bash, inelegant, overly verbose and unnecessarily convoluted. But yes, it is the best solution MS has ever come up with to remotely administer servers in a programmatic way.
What a bloody pity they just didn't admit their long battle against *nix was idiotic, and just implement Bash and the standard toolset. But then, I guess the obfuscation which has been so much a part of NT and its descendants' success would disappear as well.
I just hope all the Redmondites see the irony of MS sitting around for two decades declaring NT's superiority because, you know, Windows and all, and now essentially reinventing, badly in many cases, what the Unix ecosystem has had for decades.
Windows had a Telnet server, to be sure. But you had to be pretty damned careful as to which commands you used. We did play around with Cygwin's bash script running in a TTY on Windows 2000, but it was clunky and slow (like everything in Cygwin was, and maybe still is, I dropped it years ago). In the end it just wasn't a very good CLI-based management platform because 1. there was no good native pure CLI-based toolset to administer a system, 2. no good TTY based text editor, and 3. it was bloody Telnet, and unless you were going to throw everything in an encrypted tunnel, it simply wasn't secure enough for production servers.
Slashdot Mirror
Shoes are used a lot in crimes, too. Perhaps these states would feel it necessary to put radio transmitters in all shoes sold within their jurisdiction, you know, because TERRORISTS and PEDOPHILES!
At least you folks are answering questions. I'll take a wait and see, buff SourceForge was once great, and it would be nice to see regain at least some ground.
I learned to program primarily on Radio Shack machines (MC-10 and Color Computer, boy that brings back memories). I found the GWBASIC/QBasic interpreters fairly close to the old Tandy/RS variants of Microsoft BASIC. The Commodore interpreter, which was also an MS BASIC variant, still seemed to have some oddities.
The problem with gaming was of course that every microcomputer had its own graphics engine, so it made porting incredibly complex in many cases. Since we're talking about computers that had, at most, 30-odd kb in free RAM, there wasn't much room for graphics abstraction. Commodore's graphics, especially on the C64, with its sprite capabilities, made it very different than the rest of the microcomputers of the time.
But text-based stuff was usually pretty easy, and I remember the adventure writing book, which was pretty cool, and I wrote a few adventure games. It actually taught me a lot about string processing, indexes and counters and the like, so these books did teach some pretty important fundamentals in a way that gave you quick results.
What you see is irrelevant. What precisely is your special ability to determine veracity of any statistical model?
You know, you can't just handwave evidence away with "It's a complex system."
If increased CO2 levels are increasing the absorption of solar energy, which you don't seem to deny, then pray tell where the fuck is that energy going, if not into the lower atmosphere and the oceans? Come on, Mr. Smarty Guy, fucking explain how "complex systems" make energy magically fucking disappear. Go on, get to it. Show how "complex systems" somehow allow violations of thermodynamics.
But only if you believe there is such a thing as sexual misconduct. It's pretty clear that on /. the number of posters that think such a thing as "inappropriate behavior" below the level of "unwanted penis insertion" even exists.
What's really fun is to watch morons and psuedoskeptics going around bandying made up statistics and literally denigrating an entire field of research as populated by liars.
Grow the fuck up. The laws of physics don't owe your fucking SUV any favors.
Proof is for mathematics and liquor. The fact that you don't know that shows you know fuck all about science.
When at least some portion of General Relativity was confirmed by the 1919 eclipse, did that mean all the cosmologists could go home, their work done?
This is more akin to firing the consultant about half way through their analysis, declaring "Yeah, you told us some things were wrong, so we don't need you tell us any more."
And economists and agronomists are going to be able to continue to develop climate models?
It's amazing, no matter how the wheel turns, people still have this desire to shoot the messenger.
Exactly. Just because a theory has been confirmed in a "larger picture" fashion hardly means there's no work left to do. It's not like cosmology is finished because General Relativity has been largely confirmed, or Proto-Indo-European studies is finished just because we know a large number of languages descended from a common ancestral tongue about 5,000 years ago.
If you are that unaware of the system, anything less than a book isnt going to help. It's a crap analogy.
And I can create Powershell like aliases in Bash. What precisely is your point? The naming scheme is terribly verbose.
I use MS products every bloody day. We upgraded to a Server 2012 network last year, we run Exchange 2010, all our workstations run Windows, with Office on them.
I have to deal with its often inelegant solutions to automation and remote administration (seriously, at one point we had GUI "scripting"). Yes, they've built better tools than they had, but all those tools ever seem to do is demonstrate the old maxim; those that don't understand Unix are doomed to re-implement it badly. Even Powershell is just gawdawful hard to use, and while it's better than the collection vbscript files, batch files, registry files and the like that came before it, I still find the process of Windows scripting just dreadful.
Windows needs Bash and the standard Unix toolkit, badly. Yes, there might be some kludges here and there, but WTF is the registry but just a bunch of setting/value pairs in a hierarchy. We were using text-based tools ten years ago to manipulate it, building registry files or using CLI registry utilities. Binary data was a pain, to be sure, but most of the registry is all just plain text.
And it's not as if Exchange is easy. Yes, there's the brain dead configuration that comes out of the box, but if you want to do anything like advanced filtering it suddenly becomes very complex. We run Exchange 2010 where I work, and a few months ago I wanted to do some scripting on incoming emails to a specific mailbox. Certainly possible, but man oh man, between being forced to work in Powershell and the awkwardness of Exchange itself, I ended up implementing it on the Postfix server that sits between the Exchange server and the network. Postfix passes off the message via STDIO to my Bash script, I pulled out the attachments I need to save elsewhere for further processing, and it's been humming like a charm ever since.
Maybe some of it has to do with the fact that I'm a *nix guy, and it's more familiar terrain, but I really can't get over just difficult Powershell and Exchange can be, where the *nix philosophy just makes things so much easier.
This is the new more moral Slashdot. They'll wait at least three hours!
I was referring to TTY access. Your misrepresenting what I said.
Am I the only one who finds Powershell exceedingly slow? Load up is crazy, and try to load in extensions like Exchange, and holy shit it crawls.
Meanwhile Bash always seems snappy, despite being a fairly complex interpreter itself.
Perhaps if it came with a dose of humility.
Oh, and Bash.
Gosh, what did we ever do before Windows 2000? Authentication by clay tablet?
It's the egocentric nature of MS's claims, that somehow computing couldn't be done without its products, that pisses me off the most. It denies an absolute vast amount of work done in these areas for decades before derivative technologies like AD even existed
Just like how Redmondites are doubtless cheering the innovation of giving Windows admins what everyone else has had for decades. This isn't a moment for pride at Redmond, but the moment when if fully recognizds just how shabbily it treated people stuck trying to do automation on its amazingly incoherent platform.
Well, whenever it appears on Server, and by that I'm assuming our Server 2012 seats won't have it, so what this amounts to is "Shell out a bunch more money in operating systems and CALs, and we'll give you this nifty feature (which every other server grade OS has had for a couple of decades now)
What do you mean no rhyme or reason? The basic toolset; cat, sh, mv, rm, and so forth are mnemonics. The point being to make the commands as short as possible while retaining some semblance of meaning. For me Powershell's absurdly verbose naming scheme is as good a sign as any that Microsoft has never really understood CLI work.
So essentially it took until 2009 for Microsoft to even begin to admit that RPC, a few rather crappy scripting host options and RDP were inadequate, but it took them over six more years to finally implement what is pretty much the gold standard of encrypted TTY interfaces.
Maybe this is part of the turning over a new leaf, but I can't help but imagine that the next version of Microsoft's coursework will announce how innovative all of this, much as it went around declaring how innovative Powershell was, when all it really is is an overly complicated descendant of Bash, inelegant, overly verbose and unnecessarily convoluted. But yes, it is the best solution MS has ever come up with to remotely administer servers in a programmatic way.
What a bloody pity they just didn't admit their long battle against *nix was idiotic, and just implement Bash and the standard toolset. But then, I guess the obfuscation which has been so much a part of NT and its descendants' success would disappear as well.
I just hope all the Redmondites see the irony of MS sitting around for two decades declaring NT's superiority because, you know, Windows and all, and now essentially reinventing, badly in many cases, what the Unix ecosystem has had for decades.
Windows had a Telnet server, to be sure. But you had to be pretty damned careful as to which commands you used. We did play around with Cygwin's bash script running in a TTY on Windows 2000, but it was clunky and slow (like everything in Cygwin was, and maybe still is, I dropped it years ago). In the end it just wasn't a very good CLI-based management platform because 1. there was no good native pure CLI-based toolset to administer a system, 2. no good TTY based text editor, and 3. it was bloody Telnet, and unless you were going to throw everything in an encrypted tunnel, it simply wasn't secure enough for production servers.