I really don't get the fetish for text file configuration that Linux has.
Text is attractive because it's a least-common-denominator and *universal* format. However inconvenient it may be to parse and organize, you can write a reasonably simple script to do it, and you can pipe it through just about any command to transform or process it in whatever way you want. With text, you never have to worry about a black box of a file, because it's always human-readable, and thus more amenable to hacking.
The downside for log files is that text-based formats are incredibly inefficient as backing stores for any substantial amount of data. And as a configuration format, it's incredibly difficult to write front-end configuration software for scripts, although less so with regular formats like json or xml. Once the configuration is in a script, automated management of that configuration pretty much goes out the window - you're essentially committed to maintaining scripts by hand. This is not a problem for system administrators or advanced users, but horrible for normal users and GUI systems.
There are legitimate points on both sides, and which side you come down on may depend on your primary use case.
Maturity isn't really about age, but of total development hours. Popularity matters, because it helps to attract contributing developers, and more can be done in a shorter amount of time. Because of it's popularity, I think it's probably fair to say that Linux has matured faster than FreeBSD. As a counter-example, GNU/Hurd has been in development for fifteen years and is still not ready for prime time at version 0.6.
Yes, but keep in mind your household essentially has a Linux system administrator. I'm guessing you probably maintain some sort of home network, handle setup tasks, and solve any issues that come up, correct?
Take yourself out of the equation, and substitute a different household with the equivalent skills/interests of your wife, who actually sounds more like a typical user than you. Can you see Linux working in that situation?
Client-side end-to-end encryption using perfect forward secrecy is the only thing we can "trust" now, sadly. Key escrow? Who gives a crap? Our government has destroyed all reasonable expectation of trust or privacy, and it's not like private corporations can't be compelled to cooperate. The problem is, it's not really feasible to vet source code for the vast majority of people, even for open source projects, since it's a highly specialized skill set. And how do we ensure that an update doesn't come along specifically to open up an exploit or a back door? Essentially, we're now in a position of trying to decide which projects we can trust with our privacy.
I used to snicker at people who thought like this, maybe throwing in a "tinfoil hat" joke here and there. Damn... it's not quite at the level of CIA implanted brain bugs, or thought-controlling water additives, but the government is getting damn creepy with it's mass surveillance.
Incidentally, Windows 7 shows live taskbar previews of all windows equally well, not just specific windows. I presume this is because the default theme (Aero) is hardware accelerated. Perhaps it's only limited to specific windows if you disable hardware acceleration.
There are enough people living in the southern part of the US for there to be enough of a market for autonomous vehicles, and that's especially true because I'd bet retired people will be a very large market. They're not going to wait until these cars can safely drive in Alaska before people in California, Arizona, and Florida start buying them.
Besides, the first generation of autonomous cars will look and behave like *any other car* when driven manually. In poor weather (anything beyond light snow or moderate precipitation), the autonomous systems will likely refuse to engage. That doesn't mean an autonomous car won't be useful the rest of the time.
I wonder why people are so convinced that rain and snow will be some insurmountable issue? There are plenty of scanning methods that can penetrate rain or snow fairly easily. A computer doesn't have to rely exclusively on vision, unlike humans.
I'm sure that sometime over the next century or so, China could dump another few feet of soil on them. If they can afford to build them, they can surely afford to maintain them.
There's nothing wrong with spending a bit more money to get a quality cable, so long as what you're looking for is better physical quality that meets the expected spec, and not "magical fairy dust" quality.
> lonely otaku dream of having a doting android-girl may be just around the corner.
Who would want an android-girl, considering that OS has big security problems and can be easily hacked or infected on-line? Everybody will want an iOS-girl, who gives them an Apple. (An apple a day keeps mankind away from the gates of Eden.)
I think iOS-girl would be a bit high-maintenance and expensive. She'd want the latest updates and newest hardware accessories, and likes to do things her own way.
On the other hand, I suspect Android-girl might have some serious abandonment issues, although at least she's fairly open about most things.
Windows 10-girl is actually pretty cute, and a lot nicer than she used to be, but only if you can put up with her family.
This tells you everything you need to know about UX designers:
It's something that gives Danny Oran, the ex-Microsoft interface designer who holds the patents for the Windows 95 Start menu and taskbar, mixed feelings.
"In some ways, it's a little disappointing the same stuff is in there," Oran says.
It's a simple, intuitive interface element that everyone who uses a PC can easily figure out how to use. Yeah, terrible tragedy, that. It's so old and crusty now, right? Who cares if people are, you know, actually getting shit done with their PC. We need some hip, new paradigm that people have to re-learn all over again.
Seriously, what the hell? Stop screwing up interfaces that are functional and familiar! I wonder if the designer of the automobile's steering wheel would have "mixed feelings" about that interface still being used in cars nearly a century later?
Agreed. I wouldn't change a thing. I spend my time worrying about my current project or my programming skills, not the layout of my keyboard. I internalized key positions decades ago, and I don't see any real benefit in trying to relearn what I've already got down pat.
There are a lot of slightly sub-optimal things in our lives that hang around due to simple inertia. The "pain in the ass" factor of learning a new keyboard layout probably outweighs potential efficiencies of completely or partially relearning how to touch-type. Most of us don't rely on maximum efficiency when typing, unless you happen to have a very specialized job in which you type a *lot*. A slightly more efficient layout probably won't make any substantial difference for most of us.
As a practical matter, choosing a non-standard keyboard layout is going to greatly inconvenience you in many ways. You'll have a dramatically limited selection of keyboards to choose from, and you're going to have problems every time you need to temporarily use someone else's standard qwerty keyboard.
I'm presuming there are no second graders here. Don't overthink it... it was just an example. Calculus, differential equations, etc. Even basic algebra is quite difficult for some. For others, it's logical, intuitive, and even beautiful. Math instructors would obviously tend to be of the latter group, and as such, might have trouble empathizing with students who "just don't get it".
Similarly, I've seen a lot of programmers who are convinced that *anyone* could easily learn to program, because *they* happen to find it easy.
I'm just not convinced that's the case. Not everyone finds the same things intuitive.
That's why I included parents in that topic (and teachers can also be helpful here). They're supposed to provide some wisdom and guidance about these sorts of things. Just have a conversation with your kids about being careful about what you post online, because those sorts of things can't *really* ever be deleted, and can have real-life consequences.
You need to start from that reality, and not with wishful thinking about being able to magically erase your past. It would be great if it were possible, but it's simply not.
Just to be clear, I do have some sympathy for people who are out in public, and are caught in an embarrassing situation not of their own making. Say, for example, a dog playing at the beach tugs at person's swimsuit and pulls it down. Pretty embarrassing, and not exactly anyone's fault. Someone films it with their smartphone and posts it online anonymously for kicks. Your situation is another good example.
This sort of thing can happen much more easily, because nowadays *everyone* has a handy videocamera available right in their smartphone. I'm perfectly fine with laws meant to protect people against that sort of abuse, or to compel services to remove photos or videos of that nature upon request. That being said, everyone has to understand that there's no way to permanently remove data from "the internet", only from a few specific sites. And anyone who downloaded that information could always upload it again. That's the hard reality of the world we live in. The information age provides some amazing benefits, but it certainly has downsides as well.
Part of this is a human problem as well. Who exactly posted these rumors on FB about you? Is passing a law about this going to fix the underlying problem here? That's sort of what I'm getting at. I'm saying that people need to understand that this is the new reality. Part of this needs to be some restraint in people NOT posting unfounded rumors about others online at the drop of a hat. I wouldn't shed a tear if the person who spread those rumors about you got reprimanded or fired because of pulling bullshit like that. Responsibility has to go both ways.
Kids & Teens: Don't post embarrassing photos or videos of yourself online, or put yourself in a position where others can post embarrassing photos or videos of you online. Don't think you can be anonymous online, because someone WILL recognize you or figure out who you are, given enough incentive. Consider it a valuable life lesson that you actually *can't* retract everything you do in life so easily.
Parent: Get involved and teach your children to be responsible online. Just like in the real world, there are rules for behaving safely and responsibly online. When things go public, there's no way to retrieve those images from everyone who may have gotten a copy, and no amount of legislation is going to change that reality, however much some people may wish it.
Legislators: Stop pretending that you can fix all the world's ills with the sweep of a pen. Start learning what IS and ISN'T possible in the online world. Or for God's sake, at least ask one of your younger tech-savvy interns before you make a fool of yourself with this sort of stuff.
Which by the way, might be able to fail itself, and keep the pilot from unlocking the tail section when it needs to be unlocked. Killing the pilot and co-pilot.Hellova world, eh?
True, but engineering is oftentimes about weighing risks against each other. The risk of pilot error in this case has been demonstrated to be a real threat. The mechanical interlock can also be designed with overriding backup systems that can be activated by the pilot in case it fails for some reason. It's far better to have the pilot use a dedicated toggle in case of a rare emergency than have to remember to flip a switch at the correct time on each flight or risk the destruction of the spacecraft.
Oh, don't misunderstand... I absolutely agree. I was simply giving an example of the benefits of higher-level language abstractions.
I'm a videogame programmer, and we generally use C++ for engine code and game systems, since it's a pretty good balance of performance vs abstraction. But we often use C#/.NET for tools, and various scripting languages for game content.
Essentially, I think a reasonable maxim is that a programmer should use the highest level of abstraction possible for the job at hand. Picking the right language for the job is important. I'd hesitate to call anything a "best mix", because it depends on the project at hand, the environment, and the team you'll be working with.
Thanks for the link. The report's gist seemed to be "Everyone should have realized that you shouldn't rely on the pilot to not flip a switch at the wrong time, the results of which will cause the spaceship to be destroyed", and then describing in detail the procedures that should have been in place to catch those sorts of issues, along with recommendations for future procedures to prevent this from happening.
As you said, it's a bit morbid, but this is generally how we learn how to make things better and safer on the bleeding edge of technology and engineering. After a serious accident, we examine the causes and look for ways we can do things better and more safely, at least in the ideal case.
Slashdot Mirror
I really don't get the fetish for text file configuration that Linux has.
Text is attractive because it's a least-common-denominator and *universal* format. However inconvenient it may be to parse and organize, you can write a reasonably simple script to do it, and you can pipe it through just about any command to transform or process it in whatever way you want. With text, you never have to worry about a black box of a file, because it's always human-readable, and thus more amenable to hacking.
The downside for log files is that text-based formats are incredibly inefficient as backing stores for any substantial amount of data. And as a configuration format, it's incredibly difficult to write front-end configuration software for scripts, although less so with regular formats like json or xml. Once the configuration is in a script, automated management of that configuration pretty much goes out the window - you're essentially committed to maintaining scripts by hand. This is not a problem for system administrators or advanced users, but horrible for normal users and GUI systems.
There are legitimate points on both sides, and which side you come down on may depend on your primary use case.
Maturity isn't really about age, but of total development hours. Popularity matters, because it helps to attract contributing developers, and more can be done in a shorter amount of time. Because of it's popularity, I think it's probably fair to say that Linux has matured faster than FreeBSD. As a counter-example, GNU/Hurd has been in development for fifteen years and is still not ready for prime time at version 0.6.
Yes, but keep in mind your household essentially has a Linux system administrator. I'm guessing you probably maintain some sort of home network, handle setup tasks, and solve any issues that come up, correct?
Take yourself out of the equation, and substitute a different household with the equivalent skills/interests of your wife, who actually sounds more like a typical user than you. Can you see Linux working in that situation?
You've stated what I *intended* to convey more clearly than I did.
Yeah, but it was more fun to make a snarky anti-Flash comment and link to an xkcd video that insulted beer (heresy, I know).
I did watch some video on their site, and it was quite beautiful. It's very impressive what commercial equipment can do.
Oh, and tally another vote for changing their name, stat.
Client-side end-to-end encryption using perfect forward secrecy is the only thing we can "trust" now, sadly. Key escrow? Who gives a crap? Our government has destroyed all reasonable expectation of trust or privacy, and it's not like private corporations can't be compelled to cooperate. The problem is, it's not really feasible to vet source code for the vast majority of people, even for open source projects, since it's a highly specialized skill set. And how do we ensure that an update doesn't come along specifically to open up an exploit or a back door? Essentially, we're now in a position of trying to decide which projects we can trust with our privacy.
I used to snicker at people who thought like this, maybe throwing in a "tinfoil hat" joke here and there. Damn... it's not quite at the level of CIA implanted brain bugs, or thought-controlling water additives, but the government is getting damn creepy with it's mass surveillance.
Oops, guess this content isn't for me then. I uninstalled Flash years ago.
Instead, I'll just share my thoughts on beer.
I think they meant to say either Win95 or Win9x.
Incidentally, Windows 7 shows live taskbar previews of all windows equally well, not just specific windows. I presume this is because the default theme (Aero) is hardware accelerated. Perhaps it's only limited to specific windows if you disable hardware acceleration.
There are enough people living in the southern part of the US for there to be enough of a market for autonomous vehicles, and that's especially true because I'd bet retired people will be a very large market. They're not going to wait until these cars can safely drive in Alaska before people in California, Arizona, and Florida start buying them.
Besides, the first generation of autonomous cars will look and behave like *any other car* when driven manually. In poor weather (anything beyond light snow or moderate precipitation), the autonomous systems will likely refuse to engage. That doesn't mean an autonomous car won't be useful the rest of the time.
I wonder why people are so convinced that rain and snow will be some insurmountable issue? There are plenty of scanning methods that can penetrate rain or snow fairly easily. A computer doesn't have to rely exclusively on vision, unlike humans.
That's now how statistics work. And being insurance companies, they know statistics.
One of the few times that reasoning DOES work is with earthquakes, but for entirely different reasons.
I'm sure that sometime over the next century or so, China could dump another few feet of soil on them. If they can afford to build them, they can surely afford to maintain them.
There's nothing wrong with spending a bit more money to get a quality cable, so long as what you're looking for is better physical quality that meets the expected spec, and not "magical fairy dust" quality.
> lonely otaku dream of having a doting android-girl may be just around the corner.
Who would want an android-girl, considering that OS has big security problems and can be easily hacked or infected on-line? Everybody will want an iOS-girl, who gives them an Apple. (An apple a day keeps mankind away from the gates of Eden.)
I think iOS-girl would be a bit high-maintenance and expensive. She'd want the latest updates and newest hardware accessories, and likes to do things her own way.
On the other hand, I suspect Android-girl might have some serious abandonment issues, although at least she's fairly open about most things.
Windows 10-girl is actually pretty cute, and a lot nicer than she used to be, but only if you can put up with her family.
What exactly do you think "rights" are but a form of social contract?
I think maybe it's code-speak directed at lonely otaku that their dream of having a doting android-girl may be just around the corner.
This tells you everything you need to know about UX designers:
It's something that gives Danny Oran, the ex-Microsoft interface designer who holds the patents for the Windows 95 Start menu and taskbar, mixed feelings.
"In some ways, it's a little disappointing the same stuff is in there," Oran says.
It's a simple, intuitive interface element that everyone who uses a PC can easily figure out how to use. Yeah, terrible tragedy, that. It's so old and crusty now, right? Who cares if people are, you know, actually getting shit done with their PC. We need some hip, new paradigm that people have to re-learn all over again.
Seriously, what the hell? Stop screwing up interfaces that are functional and familiar! I wonder if the designer of the automobile's steering wheel would have "mixed feelings" about that interface still being used in cars nearly a century later?
I'm actually okay with us not using our nukes.
Agreed. I wouldn't change a thing. I spend my time worrying about my current project or my programming skills, not the layout of my keyboard. I internalized key positions decades ago, and I don't see any real benefit in trying to relearn what I've already got down pat.
There are a lot of slightly sub-optimal things in our lives that hang around due to simple inertia. The "pain in the ass" factor of learning a new keyboard layout probably outweighs potential efficiencies of completely or partially relearning how to touch-type. Most of us don't rely on maximum efficiency when typing, unless you happen to have a very specialized job in which you type a *lot*. A slightly more efficient layout probably won't make any substantial difference for most of us.
As a practical matter, choosing a non-standard keyboard layout is going to greatly inconvenience you in many ways. You'll have a dramatically limited selection of keyboards to choose from, and you're going to have problems every time you need to temporarily use someone else's standard qwerty keyboard.
I'm presuming there are no second graders here. Don't overthink it... it was just an example. Calculus, differential equations, etc. Even basic algebra is quite difficult for some. For others, it's logical, intuitive, and even beautiful. Math instructors would obviously tend to be of the latter group, and as such, might have trouble empathizing with students who "just don't get it".
Similarly, I've seen a lot of programmers who are convinced that *anyone* could easily learn to program, because *they* happen to find it easy.
I'm just not convinced that's the case. Not everyone finds the same things intuitive.
That's why I included parents in that topic (and teachers can also be helpful here). They're supposed to provide some wisdom and guidance about these sorts of things. Just have a conversation with your kids about being careful about what you post online, because those sorts of things can't *really* ever be deleted, and can have real-life consequences.
You need to start from that reality, and not with wishful thinking about being able to magically erase your past. It would be great if it were possible, but it's simply not.
Just to be clear, I do have some sympathy for people who are out in public, and are caught in an embarrassing situation not of their own making. Say, for example, a dog playing at the beach tugs at person's swimsuit and pulls it down. Pretty embarrassing, and not exactly anyone's fault. Someone films it with their smartphone and posts it online anonymously for kicks. Your situation is another good example.
This sort of thing can happen much more easily, because nowadays *everyone* has a handy videocamera available right in their smartphone. I'm perfectly fine with laws meant to protect people against that sort of abuse, or to compel services to remove photos or videos of that nature upon request. That being said, everyone has to understand that there's no way to permanently remove data from "the internet", only from a few specific sites. And anyone who downloaded that information could always upload it again. That's the hard reality of the world we live in. The information age provides some amazing benefits, but it certainly has downsides as well.
Part of this is a human problem as well. Who exactly posted these rumors on FB about you? Is passing a law about this going to fix the underlying problem here? That's sort of what I'm getting at. I'm saying that people need to understand that this is the new reality. Part of this needs to be some restraint in people NOT posting unfounded rumors about others online at the drop of a hat. I wouldn't shed a tear if the person who spread those rumors about you got reprimanded or fired because of pulling bullshit like that. Responsibility has to go both ways.
Kids & Teens: Don't post embarrassing photos or videos of yourself online, or put yourself in a position where others can post embarrassing photos or videos of you online. Don't think you can be anonymous online, because someone WILL recognize you or figure out who you are, given enough incentive. Consider it a valuable life lesson that you actually *can't* retract everything you do in life so easily.
Parent: Get involved and teach your children to be responsible online. Just like in the real world, there are rules for behaving safely and responsibly online. When things go public, there's no way to retrieve those images from everyone who may have gotten a copy, and no amount of legislation is going to change that reality, however much some people may wish it.
Legislators: Stop pretending that you can fix all the world's ills with the sweep of a pen. Start learning what IS and ISN'T possible in the online world. Or for God's sake, at least ask one of your younger tech-savvy interns before you make a fool of yourself with this sort of stuff.
Which by the way, might be able to fail itself, and keep the pilot from unlocking the tail section when it needs to be unlocked. Killing the pilot and co-pilot.Hellova world, eh?
True, but engineering is oftentimes about weighing risks against each other. The risk of pilot error in this case has been demonstrated to be a real threat. The mechanical interlock can also be designed with overriding backup systems that can be activated by the pilot in case it fails for some reason. It's far better to have the pilot use a dedicated toggle in case of a rare emergency than have to remember to flip a switch at the correct time on each flight or risk the destruction of the spacecraft.
Oh, don't misunderstand... I absolutely agree. I was simply giving an example of the benefits of higher-level language abstractions.
I'm a videogame programmer, and we generally use C++ for engine code and game systems, since it's a pretty good balance of performance vs abstraction. But we often use C#/.NET for tools, and various scripting languages for game content.
Essentially, I think a reasonable maxim is that a programmer should use the highest level of abstraction possible for the job at hand. Picking the right language for the job is important. I'd hesitate to call anything a "best mix", because it depends on the project at hand, the environment, and the team you'll be working with.
Thanks for the link. The report's gist seemed to be "Everyone should have realized that you shouldn't rely on the pilot to not flip a switch at the wrong time, the results of which will cause the spaceship to be destroyed", and then describing in detail the procedures that should have been in place to catch those sorts of issues, along with recommendations for future procedures to prevent this from happening.
As you said, it's a bit morbid, but this is generally how we learn how to make things better and safer on the bleeding edge of technology and engineering. After a serious accident, we examine the causes and look for ways we can do things better and more safely, at least in the ideal case.