it's meaningless... for most programmers to be mucking about in the API.
Huh? So most developers don't use any of the given APIs for keyboard and mouse input, display and network stuff, file operation, etc, but write all that anew for each of their applications?
Man, if we could convince them to do otherwise that would mean we could free up man-millennia of coding time for FOSS!
I remember one case where I had a discussion with one "developer" on a discussion board who tried to change his application which :
1. Assembled the SQL in PHP
2. Sent it to Oracle
3. Read the resultset
to
1. Assemble the SQL in PHP
2. Send it to an Oracle procedure as a ONE STRING bind variable
3. Executed it in the procedure with EXECUTE IMMEDIATE
4. Returned the result as a cursor bind variable.
And he claimed he made it "more secure by using bind variables"
Thats like making your front door more secure by buying a very sophisticated $1000 lock and then putting that lock on a pedestal beside your door and dusting it weekly.;-)
Or an "We told you so". This attack vector relies on dynamic SQL inside pl/sql procedures.
Something that EVERY developer I ever learned from, and EVERY knowledgeable person on every Oracle forum I have frequented will tell you to avoid like hell.
Since :
1. It is an attack vector (as was shown now again)
2. It breaks compile time syntax checks and might put unverifiable errors into production code.
3. It breaks the built-in package/function dependency checks of pl/sql.
4. It is pretty much impossible to debug.
5. Is a possible disastrous resource hog because of multiple additional context switches between SQL and PL/SQL.
In my 8 year career of programming in pl/sql I have use dynamic SQL exactly at TWO times, and both times I programmed it in a way that dynamic SQL was executed in a read-only schema and returned exactly one result which was put into a variable and then sanity checked.
Amen on the "Retraining" part.
So far it looks like Office 2007 might be finally a possibility to push OpenOffice in a few years in my workplace, when a switch to either will mean retraining anyway.
But there are just some programs that you can not get on Linux yet. Some of those programs you may absolutely need to run your business.
And once you have multiple of those programs, you are out of luck when you try to switch. Doesn't really matter if it is to Linux or just to the next Windows version.
At the moment at work we are stuck in Windows. Windows 2000 Server on Citrix terminal servers to be precise. Because some of the software we use we can't get to work in Windows 2003 correctly. Microsoft is blaming it on Citrix, Citrix is blaming it on Microsoft, and we are stuck in the middle.
Thank God everything I wrote in the last 5 years or so is pretty much cross-platform compatible (Java, Oracle PL/SQL, Perl) so I can sit back and watch the whole mess with a bucket of popcorn.
From that viewpoint there is MS with it's mass produced cars which people buy who just go to the dealer and want a car.
Then there is OSX for those people who want a special car. Kinda like pimp my ride.
And there is Linux, which falls into two categories I guess :
1. The corporation who needs some special car built to do specific things better than the cars they can buy from the normal dealer. They get their car built at places like RedHat.
2. The kit car people who take parts and assemble their own car in the garage.
Those will probably never get much of a "market share", but they are not very likely to go away either.
I switched from Netscape to Phoenix at that time because it was more LIGHTWEIGHT.
I like programs better that do one thing, and do it good, than the ones that do everything a little.
Also, integrate Firefox into the OS? As it runs on many OSes that integration will either be bloated without end to fit all OSes, or they don't integrate well, or they fork into different versions for different OSes.
All things that not really help make the browser better, just cost a lot of time an manpower.
So when they go through with that, after Firefox 3 is may be high time to look for a more lightweight browser again.
Simple. You ASK the owner of the wireless network. Respect? When I choose to set my router in a way that allows net access to the people using the chairs and tables in the courtyard, I don't want them knocking on my door all the time asking me if they really are allowed to do that, especially at times when I'm already asleep or busy doing something else. That would be very disrespectfully.
The SSID IS the "sign" of the network. The only sign on a wireless network that has any chance of working can be a wireless signal on the network itself.
The only solution is to get the router configured properly. For consumer devices, maybe a BIG, RED Private/Public flip switch on the side of the box, that only allows non-secured access when it's on the "Public" setting.
And the scary part is the word "all". There seems to be no exception, all civilised countries are following the same trend. So you cannot even vote with your feet.
Yep. Since there is no place to go anyway, they don't even have to resort to building a Berlin Wall / Iron Curtain around the planet.
Heck, WE don't need to figure out or appraise how much one copyright for one work is worth.
Just take the amount the RIAA wants as damages for one copyright infringement, since that is what they TELL us their copyright is worth, and multiply that with the amount of copies they can theoretical make of that work, and compute the tax based on that amount.
After all, when they calculate their damages on the theoretical copies sold without pirating, why shouldn't the taxes also be calculated on the theoretical amount of possible copies.
For works that are never involved in lawsuits there would be no tax, so that would take care of those frivolous lawsuits once and for all.
Scrolling by moving up and down would mean that you reach the end of the touch area at the bottom or top and would have to re-position your finger. But you can keep up a continuous circular motion as long as you need to scroll.
OTOH it makes not much sense to keep something turning more than 360, so you are not as likely to run out of screen touch real-estate by doing that with up-and down movements.
But cutting in with a power saw will take at least a few seconds, maybe even minutes, and the RAM only holds the content for seconds or minutes after power down according to the article
So they would have to power-saw in while the power is on and the hard drive is still spinning, so they then would maybe have the password out of the RAM, but there is also the chance the hard drive will be somewhat damaged during that.
(You could even mount the hard drive in the place where the most likely attack vector of a power saw would be, so they saw through the hard drive while breaking in)
The change from a free democracy to a dictatorship in 1930s Germany took just a few years, though.
It was in memory of that quick change that German has had some of the strictest privacy laws and checks on the government until some years ago.
And now they are slowly being demolished one by one on the grounds that "We don't need them, because the government isn't evil", and everyone seems to have forgotten how quickly a government might turn evil when there are not strict laws in place to stop it.
The one thing I miss about AltaVista is the facility to search for words "near" words.
Especially when I search for a specific phrase I don't completely remember that made it a lot easier to narrow down the results, since in Google I don't find anything when I put it in quotes, but when I don't put it in quotes I get buried in results.
>I think you are confused about what an electronic bill of lading is.
Maybe. I'm sure that what I was talking about is used in the way I was talking about it in Germany, and is called "Lieferschein". If that is not the "Bill of lading" in English, then my dictionary is wrong.
RFID (or barcode identification of pallets as we do it) is great, because you don't have to count all the stuff that comes in, because the supplier has already counted it when it was loaded.
When you receive a truck with one bill of lading and ~30 pallets, it's much easier to scan each pallet, and confirm what is on there against the electronically supplied list than to try to check 30 pallets by running from pallet to pallet with the bill of lading.
And the supplier also has advantages.
For example, we often order things that are not currently available, and most suppliers are authorized to send replacement products. They now can simply slap them into the delivery with the electronic bill of lading without any additional paperwork to get their bills paid.
Of course we went the opposite way on the psychology and offered to "pay $x more" if the pallet is identifiable electronically than the other way around.;-)
Yep. And then Westinghouse got wind of it, and thought "Wireless energy? How the hell will we be able to bill people for using it?" and axed the project.
Which will still be a problem today, even when they overcome the technical problems.
Slashdot Mirror
Huh? So most developers don't use any of the given APIs for keyboard and mouse input, display and network stuff, file operation, etc, but write all that anew for each of their applications?
Man, if we could convince them to do otherwise that would mean we could free up man-millennia of coding time for FOSS!
Just as boats make lousy cars and cars make lousy boats.
But there is a small niche market for amphibian vehicles.
There could be a small niche market for driving planes.
Definitely no mass-market, but maybe a few dozen a year or so.
Well, you can definitely see to the front, left and right.
You cant see back over your shoulders or back directly behind you.
Exactly the same blind spots I had when I did drive that delivery truck some years back, and the same blind spots bigger trucks have.
So they would just have to add enough detachable mirrors that had to be fitted for driving.
obviously it's an attempt to establish nanolinguistic spelling as an art form.
Method is already invented.
Method is already implemented
ping times were not so good.
And your neighbor leeching your wireless is bad enough, imagine him catching your pigeons to get his pron. ;-)
That is unfortunately true.
I remember one case where I had a discussion with one "developer" on a discussion board who tried to change his application which :
to
And he claimed he made it "more secure by using bind variables"
Thats like making your front door more secure by buying a very sophisticated $1000 lock and then putting that lock on a pedestal beside your door and dusting it weekly. ;-)
Or an "We told you so". This attack vector relies on dynamic SQL inside pl/sql procedures.
Something that EVERY developer I ever learned from, and EVERY knowledgeable person on every Oracle forum I have frequented will tell you to avoid like hell.
Since :
1. It is an attack vector (as was shown now again)
2. It breaks compile time syntax checks and might put unverifiable errors into production code.
3. It breaks the built-in package/function dependency checks of pl/sql.
4. It is pretty much impossible to debug.
5. Is a possible disastrous resource hog because of multiple additional context switches between SQL and PL/SQL.
In my 8 year career of programming in pl/sql I have use dynamic SQL exactly at TWO times, and both times I programmed it in a way that dynamic SQL was executed in a read-only schema and returned exactly one result which was put into a variable and then sanity checked.
Amen on the "Retraining" part. So far it looks like Office 2007 might be finally a possibility to push OpenOffice in a few years in my workplace, when a switch to either will mean retraining anyway.
And once you have multiple of those programs, you are out of luck when you try to switch. Doesn't really matter if it is to Linux or just to the next Windows version.
At the moment at work we are stuck in Windows. Windows 2000 Server on Citrix terminal servers to be precise. Because some of the software we use we can't get to work in Windows 2003 correctly. Microsoft is blaming it on Citrix, Citrix is blaming it on Microsoft, and we are stuck in the middle.
Thank God everything I wrote in the last 5 years or so is pretty much cross-platform compatible (Java, Oracle PL/SQL, Perl) so I can sit back and watch the whole mess with a bucket of popcorn.
Ah, so THAT's the reason. They re-designed dilbert.com to drive more traffic to the syndicated sites.
From that viewpoint there is MS with it's mass produced cars which people buy who just go to the dealer and want a car.
Then there is OSX for those people who want a special car. Kinda like pimp my ride.
And there is Linux, which falls into two categories I guess :
Those will probably never get much of a "market share", but they are not very likely to go away either.
That is exactly the thing.
I switched from Netscape to Phoenix at that time because it was more LIGHTWEIGHT.
I like programs better that do one thing, and do it good, than the ones that do everything a little.
Also, integrate Firefox into the OS? As it runs on many OSes that integration will either be bloated without end to fit all OSes, or they don't integrate well, or they fork into different versions for different OSes.
All things that not really help make the browser better, just cost a lot of time an manpower.
So when they go through with that, after Firefox 3 is may be high time to look for a more lightweight browser again.
The SSID IS the "sign" of the network. The only sign on a wireless network that has any chance of working can be a wireless signal on the network itself.
The only solution is to get the router configured properly. For consumer devices, maybe a BIG, RED Private/Public flip switch on the side of the box, that only allows non-secured access when it's on the "Public" setting.
Yep. Since there is no place to go anyway, they don't even have to resort to building a Berlin Wall / Iron Curtain around the planet.
Heck, WE don't need to figure out or appraise how much one copyright for one work is worth.
Just take the amount the RIAA wants as damages for one copyright infringement, since that is what they TELL us their copyright is worth, and multiply that with the amount of copies they can theoretical make of that work, and compute the tax based on that amount.
After all, when they calculate their damages on the theoretical copies sold without pirating, why shouldn't the taxes also be calculated on the theoretical amount of possible copies.
For works that are never involved in lawsuits there would be no tax, so that would take care of those frivolous lawsuits once and for all.
Seems to make sense to me.
Scrolling by moving up and down would mean that you reach the end of the touch area at the bottom or top and would have to re-position your finger. But you can keep up a continuous circular motion as long as you need to scroll.
OTOH it makes not much sense to keep something turning more than 360, so you are not as likely to run out of screen touch real-estate by doing that with up-and down movements.
Ah, but the 60s were about faster!, higher!, stronger!
Today it's about cheaper!, cheaper!, cheaper! (no matter what the cost)
But cutting in with a power saw will take at least a few seconds, maybe even minutes, and the RAM only holds the content for seconds or minutes after power down according to the article
So they would have to power-saw in while the power is on and the hard drive is still spinning, so they then would maybe have the password out of the RAM, but there is also the chance the hard drive will be somewhat damaged during that.
(You could even mount the hard drive in the place where the most likely attack vector of a power saw would be, so they saw through the hard drive while breaking in)
>things change in 60 years
The change from a free democracy to a dictatorship in 1930s Germany took just a few years, though.
It was in memory of that quick change that German has had some of the strictest privacy laws and checks on the government until some years ago.
And now they are slowly being demolished one by one on the grounds that "We don't need them, because the government isn't evil", and everyone seems to have forgotten how quickly a government might turn evil when there are not strict laws in place to stop it.
The one thing I miss about AltaVista is the facility to search for words "near" words.
Especially when I search for a specific phrase I don't completely remember that made it a lot easier to narrow down the results, since in Google I don't find anything when I put it in quotes, but when I don't put it in quotes I get buried in results.
Yep. Checked another dictionary.
The correct English term would be bill of delivery or bill of sale.
>I think you are confused about what an electronic bill of lading is. Maybe. I'm sure that what I was talking about is used in the way I was talking about it in Germany, and is called "Lieferschein". If that is not the "Bill of lading" in English, then my dictionary is wrong.
RFID (or barcode identification of pallets as we do it) is great, because you don't have to count all the stuff that comes in, because the supplier has already counted it when it was loaded.
;-)
When you receive a truck with one bill of lading and ~30 pallets, it's much easier to scan each pallet, and confirm what is on there against the electronically supplied list than to try to check 30 pallets by running from pallet to pallet with the bill of lading.
And the supplier also has advantages.
For example, we often order things that are not currently available, and most suppliers are authorized to send replacement products. They now can simply slap them into the delivery with the electronic bill of lading without any additional paperwork to get their bills paid.
Of course we went the opposite way on the psychology and offered to "pay $x more" if the pallet is identifiable electronically than the other way around.
Yep. And then Westinghouse got wind of it, and thought "Wireless energy? How the hell will we be able to bill people for using it?" and axed the project.
Which will still be a problem today, even when they overcome the technical problems.