I use a shredder for everything with my name on it. Strip is probably OK (it's not that it can't be reconstructed, it's that the crooks will just move on to something simpler), but if you want to be safe, use cross-cut.
I would like to see them implement rsync to get data to them, but as its primarily a data-storage service, and not a backup-service (ie its for your web app to hold and access data,
rsync is a general protocol for transfering data between different machines; it's not just useful for backup.
Furthermore, many UNIX applications store data in directories and use file system primitives for moving them around; rsync is a good choice for that.
Package managers are fine, for those specific systems which actually use that package manager. And I have often had to install application XYZ version 123 manually because no package existed, or because the only available version was (very) old.
Ah, and how praytell do you do that on Windows? If Adobe Photoshop has a serious bug that's fixed in the unpackaged development version of Photoshop, how exactly do you pull down the Photoshop sources and compile it by hand? In fact, what you do in real life is that you live with the bug until Adobe gets around to making a new packaged release, which is usually long after they have actually fixed the bug.
As I've said before, software installation/uninstallation is for me the most annoying operation on all Linux and BSD systems I use and have used. And please, don't tell me to RTFM. [...] Nowadays I see computers as a tool, not a hobby.
No, the proper answer to your complaints is STFU. If you want to use Linux as a tool, then stick with the supported, binary packages and live with the bugs until they get fixed in the official, packaged releases, just like you do on Windows and MacOS.
And if you really do want to install a group of related applications and libraries from source, most source distributions make that trivial: you use "./configure --prefix=/usr/local/myapp", where "myapp" is the name for whatever you want to call that stuff. After you're done making and installing that stuff, everything will be nicely put together in the directory "/usr/local/myapp" and properly refer to each other. Short of reading your mind, this is the simplest possible way to address this problem.
This is my experience, it's not so negative as that of many others using Windows. YMMV.
It doesn't matter whether you think it sort-of-works, Windows applications simply aren't designed to have their registry settings whacked and their shared DLLs removed, and applications will fail and things will break.
Actually, the fact that you need to make a "fresh install of Windows" at all should tell you that there is something very wrong with the way Windows handles packages in the first place; for Linux distributions like Debian or Ubuntu, it is never necessary to make a "fresh install".
Every 2 years or so I reinstall my WinOS (partition 1), while keeping my applications installed (on partition 2). I use lots of software, yet cannot recall the last time an application I use failed to start because it was missing registry keys. Apart from registration information and some special applications like debuggers, of course.
That statement is so at odds with reality that there is no explanation other than that you making it up. Among other things, file associations disappear when you do that. Also, shared DLLs disappear.
Actually, yes, you can do all that and a whole lot more. The NT kernel is really powerful and general. And that's why the NT kernel sucks: it has too many features, not too few.
USB drives work fine out of the box on Ubuntu and SuSE: you plug them in and they appear on the desktop. In fact, unlike Windows, it even works reliably.
The telephone, the telegraph, television, and antibiotics aren't "Christian inventions", and those "1001 Islamic inventions" are not "Islamic inventions" either.
Islam is a religion, like Christianity, Judaism, and many others. As a religion, Islam is largely not concerned with inventions, and when people who happen to be of a particular faith invent something, it's usually a coincidence.
Trying to portray those inventions as "Islamic inventions" is a misrepresentation intended to improve the perception rational Westerners have of that religion. But whether some Muslim 1000 years ago had the freedom to invent something has nothing to do with what role modern Islam plays in the world.
It's one thing to deal with the very real fact that we can't just up and leave. It's quite another to argue against researching ways to leave on the basis that we shouldn't ever because we can't now.
I'm not "arguing against it", in the sense that I care either way whether people do it or not. I'm just stating that the argument that we need hyperdrive to protect ourselves from cosmic catastrophes is bogus.
The only catastrophe we have to protect ourselves from is ourselves. And it is completely clear that we won't get hyperdrive and space colonization in time to protect us from that even if those things were possible.
The problem with the NASA hyperdrive program is not that it costs money, the problem is that people like you think it's going to be an alternative to cleaning up our act here at home.
You will not get off this planet, and neither will many generations to come. There won't be self-sustaining space colonies, and there won't be interstellar travel. We either live on this planet or we die on this planet. Deal with it.
If the VM the rootkit installs does decent hardware emulation and has good drivers, your Windows system may be more stable than if you let Windows talk directly to the hardware.:-(
For mainstream adoption, Windows basically requires support from the PC vendor. That's particulary true on Macs, which are going to have some non-standard hardware.
And why would you want to boot Windows anyway? It will run fine on a virtual machine under OS X.
It's not the kind of bug that people would put in intentionally; it's more a conceptual error, made when trying to retrofit digital signatures into an email system not designed for it.
As to where it came from, you can check the version control log files; it's all there.
The way this works at big companies is pretty simple.
Everybody is evaluated; the evaluation is political, it's painful, and managers don't want to do it, so the results are less than perfect. You should worry if you end up near the bottom, but that's all.
But, in the end, it doesn't matter that much: when times are good, those curves move up and everybody gets a raise.
When times are not so good, nobody gets a raise, except for people who manage to negotiate one. That's the situation Microsoft is in, because although they are still looking good financially, they know they're in trouble.
How do you negotiate a raise? You get a better offer from somewhere else and negotiate. If your company wants to keep you, they'll make a counteroffer. If you made yourself a nuisance or if they think you're not that useful, they'll wish you good luck in your new job.
That story is phrased so that it might suggest like Linux isn't being a big success for Novell, but that's bullshit. Novell had a cash cow with a proprietary enterprise product. That's history. It's history because the market has changed. There is no reason at all to expect that they will ever do as well with any other product.
The fact that they have been able to turn Linux into a business for them at all is a good thing.
That will just raise another generation of programmers who confuse pointer arithmetic with efficient programming. We already have too many of those, and that's why applications keep crashing left and right, and why software releases keep getting delayed.
People need to learn about pointers, but they need to learn about it understanding that's it's a special purpose technique to be used rarely. C# is a good language for that, since it has pointers but discourages their use.
Yeah, and you're still irrational and prejudiced, no matter how much you learn.
The problem with BASIC used to be that it didn't have any data structures, objects, or structured programming constructs. Well, those things have been fixed. VB is a modern dynamically typed language. It wouldn't be my first choice for a teaching language (among other things, because it's proprietary), but it's a reasonable choice.
C#, Delphi, and Java are too complex as first programming languages. In fact, I think first programming languages just shouldn't be statically typed.
Personally, I'd choose Python as a first programming language: it's clean, has everything a programming language needs, and it's also useful.
DC power is not very good for distributing power over anything other than short distances, in particular given how trivial AC-to-DC conversion is using modern solid state power supplies. Once you reach the end user, then DC starts making more sense.
Once you vote on the GOP-supported electronic voting machines, they will probably know how you would have voted if your vote had actually been counted.
Slashdot Mirror
I use a shredder for everything with my name on it. Strip is probably OK (it's not that it can't be reconstructed, it's that the crooks will just move on to something simpler), but if you want to be safe, use cross-cut.
I would like to see them implement rsync to get data to them, but as its primarily a data-storage service, and not a backup-service (ie its for your web app to hold and access data,
rsync is a general protocol for transfering data between different machines; it's not just useful for backup.
Furthermore, many UNIX applications store data in directories and use file system primitives for moving them around; rsync is a good choice for that.
My minimal requirements would be Webdav, sftp, and rsync-ssh; SOAP and REST I don't care about.
Oh, and also it should come from a company that isn't running a vast data mining operation.
Package managers are fine, for those specific systems which actually use that package manager. And I have often had to install application XYZ version 123 manually because no package existed, or because the only available version was (very) old.
Ah, and how praytell do you do that on Windows? If Adobe Photoshop has a serious bug that's fixed in the unpackaged development version of Photoshop, how exactly do you pull down the Photoshop sources and compile it by hand? In fact, what you do in real life is that you live with the bug until Adobe gets around to making a new packaged release, which is usually long after they have actually fixed the bug.
As I've said before, software installation/uninstallation is for me the most annoying operation on all Linux and BSD systems I use and have used. And please, don't tell me to RTFM. [...] Nowadays I see computers as a tool, not a hobby.
No, the proper answer to your complaints is STFU. If you want to use Linux as a tool, then stick with the supported, binary packages and live with the bugs until they get fixed in the official, packaged releases, just like you do on Windows and MacOS.
And if you really do want to install a group of related applications and libraries from source, most source distributions make that trivial: you use "./configure --prefix=/usr/local/myapp", where "myapp" is the name for whatever you want to call that stuff. After you're done making and installing that stuff, everything will be nicely put together in the directory "/usr/local/myapp" and properly refer to each other. Short of reading your mind, this is the simplest possible way to address this problem.
This is my experience, it's not so negative as that of many others using Windows. YMMV.
It doesn't matter whether you think it sort-of-works, Windows applications simply aren't designed to have their registry settings whacked and their shared DLLs removed, and applications will fail and things will break.
Actually, the fact that you need to make a "fresh install of Windows" at all should tell you that there is something very wrong with the way Windows handles packages in the first place; for Linux distributions like Debian or Ubuntu, it is never necessary to make a "fresh install".
Every 2 years or so I reinstall my WinOS (partition 1), while keeping my applications installed (on partition 2). I use lots of software, yet cannot recall the last time an application I use failed to start because it was missing registry keys. Apart from registration information and some special applications like debuggers, of course.
That statement is so at odds with reality that there is no explanation other than that you making it up. Among other things, file associations disappear when you do that. Also, shared DLLs disappear.
Well, I think removing "Program Files\AppName\*" makes more sense
/etc, /usr/bin, /usr/lib and whatnot
;)
Except that that will leave a lot of crap behind: registry entries, DLLs, configuration files, etc.
than hunting for a bunch of different files in
You don't need to "hunt" at all; something like "apt-get remove package" will automatically remove all bits and pieces of "package".
Disclaimer: I'm sure a Linux user will soon point out why this Windows paradigm is such a pain.
The problem is more that you don't know what you're doing...
Actually, yes, you can do all that and a whole lot more. The NT kernel is really powerful and general. And that's why the NT kernel sucks: it has too many features, not too few.
USB drives work fine out of the box on Ubuntu and SuSE: you plug them in and they appear on the desktop. In fact, unlike Windows, it even works reliably.
The telephone, the telegraph, television, and antibiotics aren't "Christian inventions", and those "1001 Islamic inventions" are not "Islamic inventions" either.
Islam is a religion, like Christianity, Judaism, and many others. As a religion, Islam is largely not concerned with inventions, and when people who happen to be of a particular faith invent something, it's usually a coincidence.
Trying to portray those inventions as "Islamic inventions" is a misrepresentation intended to improve the perception rational Westerners have of that religion. But whether some Muslim 1000 years ago had the freedom to invent something has nothing to do with what role modern Islam plays in the world.
It's one thing to deal with the very real fact that we can't just up and leave. It's quite another to argue against researching ways to leave on the basis that we shouldn't ever because we can't now.
I'm not "arguing against it", in the sense that I care either way whether people do it or not. I'm just stating that the argument that we need hyperdrive to protect ourselves from cosmic catastrophes is bogus.
The only catastrophe we have to protect ourselves from is ourselves. And it is completely clear that we won't get hyperdrive and space colonization in time to protect us from that even if those things were possible.
Procrastination is indeed often a good policy; it's also called "setting priorities".
The problem with the NASA hyperdrive program is not that it costs money, the problem is that people like you think it's going to be an alternative to cleaning up our act here at home.
You will not get off this planet, and neither will many generations to come. There won't be self-sustaining space colonies, and there won't be interstellar travel. We either live on this planet or we die on this planet. Deal with it.
So do you think it is a good idea to keep all of our eggs in one basket?
It's not like we have a choice right now.
However, if we can get off this planet and colonize other worlds, humanity will survive regardless of what happens to the Earth.
Given earth's history, we can easily afford to wait a hundred thousand years before even starting to worry about getting off this planet.
If the VM the rootkit installs does decent hardware emulation and has good drivers, your Windows system may be more stable than if you let Windows talk directly to the hardware. :-(
For mainstream adoption, Windows basically requires support from the PC vendor. That's particulary true on Macs, which are going to have some non-standard hardware.
And why would you want to boot Windows anyway? It will run fine on a virtual machine under OS X.
It's not the kind of bug that people would put in intentionally; it's more a conceptual error, made when trying to retrofit digital signatures into an email system not designed for it.
As to where it came from, you can check the version control log files; it's all there.
The way this works at big companies is pretty simple.
Everybody is evaluated; the evaluation is political, it's painful, and managers don't want to do it, so the results are less than perfect. You should worry if you end up near the bottom, but that's all.
But, in the end, it doesn't matter that much: when times are good, those curves move up and everybody gets a raise.
When times are not so good, nobody gets a raise, except for people who manage to negotiate one. That's the situation Microsoft is in, because although they are still looking good financially, they know they're in trouble.
How do you negotiate a raise? You get a better offer from somewhere else and negotiate. If your company wants to keep you, they'll make a counteroffer. If you made yourself a nuisance or if they think you're not that useful, they'll wish you good luck in your new job.
It's perfectly fine to subset SQL, IMO.
The fact that so many databases do subset SQL99, however, is perhaps an indication that we would benefit from a well defined "SQL Light" subset.
That story is phrased so that it might suggest like Linux isn't being a big success for Novell, but that's bullshit. Novell had a cash cow with a proprietary enterprise product. That's history. It's history because the market has changed. There is no reason at all to expect that they will ever do as well with any other product.
The fact that they have been able to turn Linux into a business for them at all is a good thing.
That will just raise another generation of programmers who confuse pointer arithmetic with efficient programming. We already have too many of those, and that's why applications keep crashing left and right, and why software releases keep getting delayed.
People need to learn about pointers, but they need to learn about it understanding that's it's a special purpose technique to be used rarely. C# is a good language for that, since it has pointers but discourages their use.
Yeah, and you're still irrational and prejudiced, no matter how much you learn.
The problem with BASIC used to be that it didn't have any data structures, objects, or structured programming constructs. Well, those things have been fixed. VB is a modern dynamically typed language. It wouldn't be my first choice for a teaching language (among other things, because it's proprietary), but it's a reasonable choice.
C#, Delphi, and Java are too complex as first programming languages. In fact, I think first programming languages just shouldn't be statically typed.
Personally, I'd choose Python as a first programming language: it's clean, has everything a programming language needs, and it's also useful.
Bill Gates did invent the Internet after all, says Microsoft. No, really.
DC power is not very good for distributing power over anything other than short distances, in particular given how trivial AC-to-DC conversion is using modern solid state power supplies. Once you reach the end user, then DC starts making more sense.
Once you vote on the GOP-supported electronic voting machines, they will probably know how you would have voted if your vote had actually been counted.