There is no kinda doing XP, the creators of XP have always been very clear that you either blindly follow all their arbitrary rules, or you are not doing XP, and your bad results are your own fault for not doing XP. Again, its all about laying blame, that's what they created it for, shifting the blame off of themselves as programmers, and onto their percieved enemies (customers).
XP is exactly what I described. Agile development whores have tried to adopt XP and pretend its an agile methodology since PHBs have heard of XP. Agile development means working with the customer. XP means making the customer come up with a spec that they can't possibly create, doing it, and then blaming the customer for it being wrong. XP is where you create stories for each iteration. Agile development doesn't do iterations, the project is always evolving as the customer is involved and providing feedback.
XP is designed to shift the blame off of the programmers and on to the customers. "You didn't properly define the spec". Of course, the customer never knows enough to be able to define a spec detailed enough, so it always results in the dev team making something the customer isn't happy with, the customer getting the blame for it, and then yet another iteration is done to "fix" it based on the new spec. Repeat this process until the customer gives up and accepts what they get, or they give up and go somewhere better.
Agile development is about working with the customer, giving them something to see and test and provide feedback on as quickly as possible. Instead of giving them crap they don't want in a week like XP, give them a basic test in 2 days, and then refine it to be what they want over the rest of the week.
The fact that you didn't even read what you replied to (hint: he said "MOVIE-SPECIFIC" star wars games), or the fact that you got modded insightful for being an idiot.
Are you sure they evaluated pgcluster and not something else? PGcluster is sync, there's no option to be async, and there never has been. So the claim that its not synchronous means they either tried something else and not pgcluster, or they don't know what they are talking about.
As for performance, I haven't had such a big slowdown. Then again, I am using pgcluster and not whatever you are talking about.
It is not inflexible or inefficient. I don't know what magic requirements you had, but it is a full, synchronous, multi-master replication solution. It handles things like random() and sequences properly, and allows for load balancing, failover and online re-syncing of new members/failed members.
If you can't give actual facts to backup your claims, then you are just spreading FUD.
There is no IP in docs. Tons of companies release docs. Just because a few companies are trying to protect their deceit, and make up bullshit IP excuses to justify their behaviour, doesn't mean you need to be a good corporate bitch and retell their lies endlessly.
"What is the difference between a $600 quadro and an outdated $85 Geforce4? THe firmwire is flashed differently and the drivers will optimize for accuracy vs performance between the 2."
That's not protecting IP, its protecting the fact that they are scamming customers.
"Also designs are copyrighted and if you open the source a competitor could argue that companyA neglected its copyright by opening it to the public, so therefore its ok to steal the design. May not be entirely true since copyright is designed to share work, but an ignorant judge could look at it as carelessness for being open."
You have absolutely no clue what you are talking about. Copyright does not need to be protected to be valid, that's trademark.
"WIFI is required to be closed and proprietary by the FCC under Powell. The government can revoke its license to produce wifi cards otherwise."
Yeah, that would explain why several companies have fully open docs for their wifi chips, thus enabling completely open source drivers for them.
The rest of your post is irrelivant windows nonsense that has nothing to do with the topic.
They don't release the source. There is no source. That's the whole point. They just release the programming docs so anyone can write a driver. There is no IP for them to protect.
I mean really, its not like network admin staff have administrative access to the entire IT infrastructure. Who cares if any random Joe can walk by the cube farm and look at potentially confidential information?
Get a clue dumbass, this is the same reason people who deal with confidential financial info aren't in open cube farms.
Copyright addresses websites just fine. Viewing a webpage is well within your rights. Making a locally cached copy is very likely fair use. Displaying it publicly is a reserved right of the copyright holder, and so you can't do that.
And yes, an ISP caching my website is then redistributing my copyrighted work without my consent. That is obviously not allowed. However as the copyright holder, it is up to me to do something about it. So if I want to take the ISP to court and get a C&D filed to force them to stop distributing it I can. But who is dumb enough to do that? Why would I want to stop the ISP from doing that? I don't have to shutdown anyone violating my copyright if I don't want to.
Actually, I found that having the language mashed into the webserver was a bad thing. PHP, perl, ruby, python, java, etc, etc, etc all can do fastcgi. This gives you persistant apps, just as fast as if it were in the webserver, but without the ability to crash your websever, running as seperate users, and with the ability to do things like store persistant objects without having to do anything special at all. Even just simple things like using persistant database connections without having to have one connection for every apache thread/process is really nice. I don't want a database connection open just to serve a static file.
Lighttpd works, is solid, scalable, and is supported by many languages and many people. Its also has a much smaller footprint than apache, and some cool modules apache doesn't have alternatives for. So why don't most people use it?
Not that there is anything particularly horrible about apache, but alot of sites could use something smaller, and less of a memory hog like lighttpd. But yet they use apache anyways "cause we're using linux", as if the only webservers that exist are apache and IIS.
No, you have the authority of the legal system from registering trademarks. This has nothing to do with what people give you. And trying to say you are right because you feel the majority of people accept your nonsense is retarded. The majority is not always right, in fact they are often very uninformed and dumb.
And I don't care about your retarded princess bride bullshit. No follow-up is "authoritative", its an opinion. I do believe that you need to see a mental health professional though.
"A few nutcases think that open source shouldn't mean anything, or that it should mean everything, or only the things THEY say it means."
So, by your own definition you are one of those nutcases then? OSI is all about trying to say they get to define what is and is not open source. I don't think the poster you replied to is one of those nutcases, since he thinks open source should mean what the dictionary definition says it does. Source, that is open. Not "whatever the OSI decides suits their agenda", which is what you somehow think is right.
"pretty much everyone understands "open source" to mean that you can not only see the code, but also (perhaps subject to some restrictions) use the code in your own work."
Pretty much everyone understands "ironic" to mean anything they randomly decide to call ironic for no reason, but that doesn't change the meaning of the word, it just makes them stupid.
I can't use GPL code in my own work, so does that mean its not open source? Trying to classify what arbitrary restrictions can be put on something and have it still be "open source" is a waste of time. There is an infinite number of restrictions, and nobody who can make that call.
So, you end up with people like Russ who try to take advantage of trends by trademarking a term so they can redefine its meaning in the marketing/buzzword world. And then you have people who understand english and know what "open" and "source" mean, and that they don't magically mean something totally different if you put them together.
I didn't say anything about java not being useful, quit being so defensive. The fact is people using dynamic languages can code faster than people using java. Or are you going to try to pretend that you can do the same thing faster in C than you can in java? We all know its nonsense, pretending otherwise won't change anything.
Since you can't make something 100% perfectly secure, we shouldn't bother trying right? Just produce complete and utter crap like IE, IIS, Mozilla, etc?
You tend to see 5 java programmers doing the job of a single perl developer (for web programming). Not suprising that people need lots of java programmers.
Slashdot Mirror
There is no kinda doing XP, the creators of XP have always been very clear that you either blindly follow all their arbitrary rules, or you are not doing XP, and your bad results are your own fault for not doing XP. Again, its all about laying blame, that's what they created it for, shifting the blame off of themselves as programmers, and onto their percieved enemies (customers).
XP is exactly what I described. Agile development whores have tried to adopt XP and pretend its an agile methodology since PHBs have heard of XP. Agile development means working with the customer. XP means making the customer come up with a spec that they can't possibly create, doing it, and then blaming the customer for it being wrong. XP is where you create stories for each iteration. Agile development doesn't do iterations, the project is always evolving as the customer is involved and providing feedback.
XP is designed to shift the blame off of the programmers and on to the customers. "You didn't properly define the spec". Of course, the customer never knows enough to be able to define a spec detailed enough, so it always results in the dev team making something the customer isn't happy with, the customer getting the blame for it, and then yet another iteration is done to "fix" it based on the new spec. Repeat this process until the customer gives up and accepts what they get, or they give up and go somewhere better.
Agile development is about working with the customer, giving them something to see and test and provide feedback on as quickly as possible. Instead of giving them crap they don't want in a week like XP, give them a basic test in 2 days, and then refine it to be what they want over the rest of the week.
The fact that you didn't even read what you replied to (hint: he said "MOVIE-SPECIFIC" star wars games), or the fact that you got modded insightful for being an idiot.
Are you sure they evaluated pgcluster and not something else? PGcluster is sync, there's no option to be async, and there never has been. So the claim that its not synchronous means they either tried something else and not pgcluster, or they don't know what they are talking about.
As for performance, I haven't had such a big slowdown. Then again, I am using pgcluster and not whatever you are talking about.
It is not inflexible or inefficient. I don't know what magic requirements you had, but it is a full, synchronous, multi-master replication solution. It handles things like random() and sequences properly, and allows for load balancing, failover and online re-syncing of new members/failed members.
If you can't give actual facts to backup your claims, then you are just spreading FUD.
There is no IP in docs. Tons of companies release docs. Just because a few companies are trying to protect their deceit, and make up bullshit IP excuses to justify their behaviour, doesn't mean you need to be a good corporate bitch and retell their lies endlessly.
"What is the difference between a $600 quadro and an outdated $85 Geforce4? THe firmwire is flashed differently and the drivers will optimize for accuracy vs performance between the 2."
That's not protecting IP, its protecting the fact that they are scamming customers.
"Also designs are copyrighted and if you open the source a competitor could argue that companyA neglected its copyright by opening it to the public, so therefore its ok to steal the design. May not be entirely true since copyright is designed to share work, but an ignorant judge could look at it as carelessness for being open."
You have absolutely no clue what you are talking about. Copyright does not need to be protected to be valid, that's trademark.
"WIFI is required to be closed and proprietary by the FCC under Powell. The government can revoke its license to produce wifi cards otherwise."
Yeah, that would explain why several companies have fully open docs for their wifi chips, thus enabling completely open source drivers for them.
The rest of your post is irrelivant windows nonsense that has nothing to do with the topic.
They don't release the source. There is no source. That's the whole point. They just release the programming docs so anyone can write a driver. There is no IP for them to protect.
Its just not part of the default postgresql install, its 3rd party. Search for pgcluster.
I mean really, its not like network admin staff have administrative access to the entire IT infrastructure. Who cares if any random Joe can walk by the cube farm and look at potentially confidential information?
Get a clue dumbass, this is the same reason people who deal with confidential financial info aren't in open cube farms.
Copyright addresses websites just fine. Viewing a webpage is well within your rights. Making a locally cached copy is very likely fair use. Displaying it publicly is a reserved right of the copyright holder, and so you can't do that.
And yes, an ISP caching my website is then redistributing my copyrighted work without my consent. That is obviously not allowed. However as the copyright holder, it is up to me to do something about it. So if I want to take the ISP to court and get a C&D filed to force them to stop distributing it I can. But who is dumb enough to do that? Why would I want to stop the ISP from doing that? I don't have to shutdown anyone violating my copyright if I don't want to.
Do you have some sort of mental block against recognizing english?
Spelt is a grain. Spelled is the past tense of spell.
Yeah, because we all know nobody would want to both play games and use photoshop.
Actually, I found that having the language mashed into the webserver was a bad thing. PHP, perl, ruby, python, java, etc, etc, etc all can do fastcgi. This gives you persistant apps, just as fast as if it were in the webserver, but without the ability to crash your websever, running as seperate users, and with the ability to do things like store persistant objects without having to do anything special at all. Even just simple things like using persistant database connections without having to have one connection for every apache thread/process is really nice. I don't want a database connection open just to serve a static file.
Lighttpd works, is solid, scalable, and is supported by many languages and many people. Its also has a much smaller footprint than apache, and some cool modules apache doesn't have alternatives for. So why don't most people use it?
Not that there is anything particularly horrible about apache, but alot of sites could use something smaller, and less of a memory hog like lighttpd. But yet they use apache anyways "cause we're using linux", as if the only webservers that exist are apache and IIS.
Have you considered a career in politics? You seem pretty good at dodging questions and trying to shift the focus to suit your self.
No, you have the authority of the legal system from registering trademarks. This has nothing to do with what people give you. And trying to say you are right because you feel the majority of people accept your nonsense is retarded. The majority is not always right, in fact they are often very uninformed and dumb.
And I don't care about your retarded princess bride bullshit. No follow-up is "authoritative", its an opinion. I do believe that you need to see a mental health professional though.
"A few nutcases think that open source shouldn't mean anything, or that it should mean everything, or only the things THEY say it means."
So, by your own definition you are one of those nutcases then? OSI is all about trying to say they get to define what is and is not open source. I don't think the poster you replied to is one of those nutcases, since he thinks open source should mean what the dictionary definition says it does. Source, that is open. Not "whatever the OSI decides suits their agenda", which is what you somehow think is right.
"pretty much everyone understands "open source" to mean that you can not only see the code, but also (perhaps subject to some restrictions) use the code in your own work."
Pretty much everyone understands "ironic" to mean anything they randomly decide to call ironic for no reason, but that doesn't change the meaning of the word, it just makes them stupid.
I can't use GPL code in my own work, so does that mean its not open source? Trying to classify what arbitrary restrictions can be put on something and have it still be "open source" is a waste of time. There is an infinite number of restrictions, and nobody who can make that call.
So, you end up with people like Russ who try to take advantage of trends by trademarking a term so they can redefine its meaning in the marketing/buzzword world. And then you have people who understand english and know what "open" and "source" mean, and that they don't magically mean something totally different if you put them together.
I didn't say anything about java not being useful, quit being so defensive. The fact is people using dynamic languages can code faster than people using java. Or are you going to try to pretend that you can do the same thing faster in C than you can in java? We all know its nonsense, pretending otherwise won't change anything.
So? Who says your experience isn't the exception to the rule? I am working in a java shop right now, and its certainly just like I said.
Since you can't make something 100% perfectly secure, we shouldn't bother trying right? Just produce complete and utter crap like IE, IIS, Mozilla, etc?
You tend to see 5 java programmers doing the job of a single perl developer (for web programming). Not suprising that people need lots of java programmers.