So you're saying that Apple is going to start making all of its accessories itself without licensing to third parties? Because that's logical.
Then again anytime someone trots out the "fanboi" argument you can be pretty sure that all sign of rational thought has left the building, so perhaps you just can't help yourself.
So when do you think apple will give it to 3rd parties? It's coming out next week, so they are seriously running out of time to get production up and running. Or do you just blindly defend apple any chance you get, truth staring you in the face or not?
I'm not complaining - I didn't make it for money so any donation is bonus - I'm just pointing out the fact that when it's optional - as ggp suggests- it's not the route to profit that he seems to think it to be.
Which is more likely - the fbi just happened to lose a laptop with millions of UDIDs that it had no reason to have and anonymous just happened to find that particular laptop? Or that someone in anonymous wanted to make waves and so made a bold (but unverifiable) claim?
I will be charging for the BB10 iteration of the software.
And I plan to release the current version to app world for non-free, though of course source will remain available for download and direct-install binaries will remain available. Just need to find interest in finishing up the legacy code base - it's difficult to spend time on it, when I know I can't use it under BB10.
I make open source software. I have a donation link on my site and in my app. I have thousands of people using my app every day.
In an average month, I receive $3 in donations*.
That's what's stopping them - people love to talk about how they don't really want this stuff for free - they only want to be able to pay a reasonable amount of money to the people who create it. But the majority of these people rarely put their money where their mouth is when actually given the opportunity to do so.
I realize I'm comparing software and entertainment, but I haven't yet seen anything that tells me people would behave differently. If they're not voluntarily paying for software that helps them do their jobs every day, I don't see the likelihood of paying for a couple hours of one-time entertainment as being very high.
* Don't get me wrong - I'm not trying to profit off of this version of my software and I appreciate even the $1.00 donations. But the data here illustrates my point nicely.
Because the first thing I see is: Note: Be sure that you use a modern, non-handicapped browser to access the links below (e.g. disable the NoScript and the likes extensions that try to turn your Web Browser essentially into the 90's Mosaic).
It was a convention and it was for fans... so I don't agree with you on this.
Oh, I agree. The more often this kind of thing occurs, the higher profile the victims are... the better.
Eventually, I can hope that a tipping point will be reached. When it happens to enough people in positions of influence, maybe we will start to see change.
You have to sit on your ass in in a massive air conditioned box just to get anywhere. Then when you get there, you have to circle around the massive parking lot to find a spot, possible battling it out with some asshole who decided to cut in line in front of you
Just for the record - if you pick a distant corner of the parking lot and park there, this is never a problem. Plus you get a little extra walking into your day.
Read the other comments: that's highly inefficient. Compare the file sizes, then diff the files until the 1st differing byte. No need to checksum two Tb files if the 1st bytes are different !
Who cares? He's doing this once - and since he's posting it to ask slashdot I think we can safely assume there's no urgency. Run it, let it go overnight or two, and move on.
You could also do another pipe to run it in one line, but this way you have a list of files and checksums if you want them for anything else in the future.
Perhaps you should read-read tfs. It's not tagging people its pulling out objects and locations. No Los of privacy for anyone except potentially the video uploader - and that person was already giving up privacy by trusting a third party.
If someone else was in the uploaded video, it wouldn't matter under this tech.
I'd rather be fat and die early having eaten the things I liked, than old, skinny and never enjoyed a triple bacon burger with extra cheese.
Is your life about only food? If that's the only thing you enjoy, then by all means yours the philosophy to live by.
In addition, nothing says you can't enjoy these foods - the key is moderation. Don't glut yourself.
It seems a common misunderstanding when it comes to "limiting caloric intake" is that you can never eat anything "bad for you"; but I think it's far more important that you don't eat a) nothing *but* 'bad for you', or b) unlimited quantites of the same.
Have a slice of pizza and a soda. Don't have half a pie and a two liter bottle of soda, and don't eat the pizza every night. Pretty simple.
There's a place for it, though I can't recommend it full-time.
I've mostly found it useful when learning my way through new code bases - I could work under guidance of someone who already knows what he's doing. Similarly, when training someone with less experience, it's been very helpful to initially run things myself, then gradually hand over control over a paired tmux session. Even now I frequently let a coworker who has significantly less experience attach to my tmux session at any time, just to see what I'm doing and how I'm doing it.
But as a full-time method of programming? Or even via physically sharing the same personal space? I would go insane.
('course what they did at my old employer was even worse. Any time they had a cube that was larger than 4 square feet, they would stuff a second programmer in it. Often these programmers weren't even working on the same projects. Current contacts tell me it's actually getting worse as they remove any sense of privacy by installing low-walled mini cubes across the entire work area. But I digress.)
Study was run by a guy at Duke University in tobacco country. They have a vested interest in keeping pot illegal? Something to consider if you have any free brain cells. Not defending pot smoking, just sayin cigarettes are as bad or worse.
You draw a conclusion and provide no supporting evidence. One could just as easily say that big tobacco has a vested interest in getting MJ legalized, so that they can package it and sell it.
Nope. I felt that one stands on its own. Unlike a fax machine this has no practical use, particularly since it negates the one potentially redeeming aspect of bitcoins. It's a product from someone who give his interviews on an irc channel, designed to meet a need that isn't held by anybody.
Of course he should try it - we should always try things, it's how progress happens - but he's not terribly likely to succeed with this one.
Slashdot Mirror
i++
Those sweeping generalizations will get you every time.
Does too. Just look at the score - it's leveled twice in Insight since I posted it. :D
Coders are the pillar of our industry. We need more of them. Here, get Visual Studio and start coding today!
Knowing how to code does not a developer make.
So you're saying that Apple is going to start making all of its accessories itself without licensing to third parties? Because that's logical.
Then again anytime someone trots out the "fanboi" argument you can be pretty sure that all sign of rational thought has left the building, so perhaps you just can't help yourself.
So when do you think apple will give it to 3rd parties? It's coming out next week, so they are seriously running out of time to get production up and running. Or do you just blindly defend apple any chance you get, truth staring you in the face or not?
How do you know they haven't? NDAs have teeth.
I'm not complaining - I didn't make it for money so any donation is bonus - I'm just pointing out the fact that when it's optional - as ggp suggests- it's not the route to profit that he seems to think it to be.
Which is more likely - the fbi just happened to lose a laptop with millions of UDIDs that it had no reason to have and anonymous just happened to find that particular laptop? Or that someone in anonymous wanted to make waves and so made a bold (but unverifiable) claim?
Pardon me, I need to go shave.
I will be charging for the BB10 iteration of the software.
And I plan to release the current version to app world for non-free, though of course source will remain available for download and direct-install binaries will remain available. Just need to find interest in finishing up the legacy code base - it's difficult to spend time on it, when I know I can't use it under BB10.
WTF is stopping them ???????????
I make open source software. I have a donation link on my site and in my app. I have thousands of people using my app every day.
In an average month, I receive $3 in donations*.
That's what's stopping them - people love to talk about how they don't really want this stuff for free - they only want to be able to pay a reasonable amount of money to the people who create it. But the majority of these people rarely put their money where their mouth is when actually given the opportunity to do so.
I realize I'm comparing software and entertainment, but I haven't yet seen anything that tells me people would behave differently. If they're not voluntarily paying for software that helps them do their jobs every day, I don't see the likelihood of paying for a couple hours of one-time entertainment as being very high.
* Don't get me wrong - I'm not trying to profit off of this version of my software and I appreciate even the $1.00 donations. But the data here illustrates my point nicely.
Because the first thing I see is:
Note: Be sure that you use a modern, non-handicapped browser to access the links below (e.g. disable the NoScript and the likes extensions that try to turn your Web Browser essentially into the 90's Mosaic).
Real men use wget. Or telnet.
Definitely telnet. It's the most secure.
It was a convention and it was for fans... so I don't agree with you on this.
Oh, I agree.
The more often this kind of thing occurs, the higher profile the victims are... the better.
Eventually, I can hope that a tipping point will be reached. When it happens to enough people in positions of influence, maybe we will start to see change.
You have to sit on your ass in in a massive air conditioned box just to get anywhere. Then when you get there, you have to circle around the massive parking lot to find a spot, possible battling it out with some asshole who decided to cut in line in front of you
Just for the record - if you pick a distant corner of the parking lot and park there, this is never a problem. Plus you get a little extra walking into your day.
yep agreed.
Read the other comments: that's highly inefficient. Compare the file sizes, then diff the files until the 1st differing byte. No need to checksum two Tb files if the 1st bytes are different !
Who cares? He's doing this once - and since he's posting it to ask slashdot I think we can safely assume there's no urgency. Run it, let it go overnight or two, and move on.
Fixed below:
find /exports -type f | xargs -d "\n" sha256sum > sums.out
uniq -d -w 64 sums.out
You could also do another pipe to run it in one line, but this way you have a list of files and checksums if you want them for anything else in the future.
Damn, just remembered that won't include the filename :) I'll reply with a fixed once I get back to my pc unless someone else beats me to it.
perhaps you could boot with a livecd and mount your windows drives under a single directory? Then:
find /your/mount/point -type f -exec sha256sum > sums.out
uniq -u -w 64 sums.out
Perhaps you should read-read tfs. It's not tagging people its pulling out objects and locations. No Los of privacy for anyone except potentially the video uploader - and that person was already giving up privacy by trusting a third party.
If someone else was in the uploaded video, it wouldn't matter under this tech.
I'd rather be fat and die early having eaten the things I liked, than old, skinny and never enjoyed a triple bacon burger with extra cheese.
Is your life about only food? If that's the only thing you enjoy, then by all means yours the philosophy to live by.
In addition, nothing says you can't enjoy these foods - the key is moderation. Don't glut yourself.
It seems a common misunderstanding when it comes to "limiting caloric intake" is that you can never eat anything "bad for you"; but I think it's far more important that you don't eat a) nothing *but* 'bad for you', or b) unlimited quantites of the same.
Have a slice of pizza and a soda. Don't have half a pie and a two liter bottle of soda, and don't eat the pizza every night. Pretty simple.
both studies show a major improvement in 'health span,' or the amount of time before age-related diseases set in
More likely by LAP-BAND®
"Dude, use a switch/case" or "Just use the library function."
If you're still making those decisions at coding time... you're doing it incorrectly.
If you're making all of those decisions at design time, you're a Java programmer.
There's a place for it, though I can't recommend it full-time.
I've mostly found it useful when learning my way through new code bases - I could work under guidance of someone who already knows what he's doing. Similarly, when training someone with less experience, it's been very helpful to initially run things myself, then gradually hand over control over a paired tmux session. Even now I frequently let a coworker who has significantly less experience attach to my tmux session at any time, just to see what I'm doing and how I'm doing it.
But as a full-time method of programming? Or even via physically sharing the same personal space? I would go insane.
('course what they did at my old employer was even worse. Any time they had a cube that was larger than 4 square feet, they would stuff a second programmer in it. Often these programmers weren't even working on the same projects. Current contacts tell me it's actually getting worse as they remove any sense of privacy by installing low-walled mini cubes across the entire work area. But I digress.)
Study was run by a guy at Duke University in tobacco country. They have a vested interest in keeping pot illegal? Something to consider if you have any free brain cells. Not defending pot smoking, just sayin cigarettes are as bad or worse.
You draw a conclusion and provide no supporting evidence. One could just as easily say that big tobacco has a vested interest in getting MJ legalized, so that they can package it and sell it.
An interesting and relevant commentary on OpenStack;
https://gist.github.com/3456841
Nope. I felt that one stands on its own. Unlike a fax machine this has no practical use, particularly since it negates the one potentially redeeming aspect of bitcoins. It's a product from someone who give his interviews on an irc channel, designed to meet a need that isn't held by anybody.
Of course he should try it - we should always try things, it's how progress happens - but he's not terribly likely to succeed with this one.