As a society, we need to realize that criminals or 'outcasts' (for whatever reason) can be extraordinarily intelligent. As a society, we need to learn how to harness their skills.
Frank Abagnale (the main character of said movie) turns from a check-forger into a designer of secure checks... by using his knowledge of what's hard to forge. We're all better off as a result.
There was a kid a couple of months ago who had the creative and technical skill to make a CounterStrike map of his school. I sure as hell can't do that. Now instead of letting him do an independent study in game design or 3d modeling, or even teach a class (after school or whatever), they sent him to a 'special' school (where they send all the stupid bullies).
We need to give people who possess this intelligence another outlet.... otherwise they'll continue to eat our lunch. Being on the wrong side of the law is obviously more interesting, which is presumably the appeal - a Google-style approach of 'work on cool projects on a flexible schedule' ought to keep them interested enough to do productive work.
Valve knows how to make really good looking games. See portal or TF2, or even better EP2.
However, those games will still run fine on a DX8 card if you turn down the settings. And the other Source games (not the source 07 games) will run on dx7 just fine.
It's something I've never figured out. Hell, even Halo 1 (PC) degraded nicely. Give gamers something they can play, and let it grow with their hardware.
That's funny, because the only bug I've ever reported (if you've moderated a discussion, you couldn't post using the D2) got fixed within the week and is currently working.
Exactly. There's absolutely no way that a processor could ever be made to be updated. It's not like those X86 instructions are implemented in code or anything. Hah. What would they call that, microcode or something? Completely stupid.:P
Let's be frank. There are some things that open-source isn't good at (see user interface design). Any pragmatic user is going to use the best tools for the job. In this case, going by the article, the example is Skype.
In another case, the best tool may be Firefox (over Internet Explorer). This is the reverse, and again it's (to many people) the best tool for the job.
I've never really understood the debate here. Yes, it would be great if the whole desktop could be open-source. But any realistic user (read: not a zealot) is going to use the best tool for the job (and so will I)
So by all means, work on replacements for Skype, graphics card drivers, and the like. There will always be people who like to write code and reverse-engineer and I say more power to them. Just let the rest of us use what works.
It's like going with an appliance (that is less efficient and less featured) just because it has schematics. Most people just use what works best.
For a distro like Ubuntu, which is supposed to work out of the box, this means closed-source. It's still a monstrous improvement over Windows.
A points system would make sense. You have 20 points, set them among gaming, websurfing, VoIP, email (bittorrent and FTP aren't interactive, so they always use idle bandwith)
Or allow the user to define their QoS. Or let the user's equipment define the QoS. Or allow the option of turning it off.
If their network damages one set of users when another set is using BitTorrent, it's not set up right.
That and the fact that even if they did want to throttle BitTorrent to benefit VoIP, sending RSTs is not the way to do it. You just speed and queue-limit it like every other QoS implementation does
That's the kind of glue I meant - an extra device-specific (probably vendor-specific) database. By using a 'commodity' OS that already-written software can be used on...
And assuming the network is closed, allowing anonymous access to query against a SKU and getting the price isn't a risk. You only need to authenticate (with the employee ID/PIN) at the POS terminal to update sales.
The same module could be used at both, assuming the price-checkers and the POS terminals are running Windows. Just code the frontends. The price-checkers have a subset of the functionality, so just disable what is unused...
I was in a Macys (long story) and ran across a price scanner. These are little gadgets with the SKU reader to tell you the price of an item, but they also had a card-reader tacked on to tell you the remaining balance.
Yes, a Windows XP desktop. The taskbar was barely visible, but off to the bottom. Internet Explorer, Recycle Bin, and My Computer were there.
This got me thinking. Why would people use such a complicated system with so many parts and so much bloat... to look up a SKU?
The best answer I can come up with is that store maintainers want to keep this data in one format. I can imagine that the server has a SQL table of the names/SKUs/prices/sales/etc, and the registers can run querys against it. It would be easiest to make your devices query the same database - no glue necessary.
Still, wouldn't some form of Linux be more suitable? The kernel can be stripped down to remove everything not necessary (all mouse and keyboard input, sound, all other network adapters and graphics cards), while still allowing the same functionality.
So I understand why they did it. I still cringe when I think the power that thing must have... just for its simplistic function.
In theory, there's a distinct upper bound on the number of cases they can bring without a radical change in tactics. There are only so many judges, and it seems like a large percentage (if not a majority) are unhappy/made aware about their tricks. They will be on the lookout the next time they have a case brought to them.
Or is the churn in judges enough that they can always take it to a new, fresh judge?
Even in that case, you have to figure that their acts get around. If it's on Slashdot, you can be sure the judges are talking to each other or something.
Re:An open letter to all the paranoid freaks...
on
TrueCrypt 6.0 Released
·
· Score: 0, Troll
So don't use it asshole. You're not forced to setting this functionality up on install.
Or are you actually enough of a dick to be saying 'well most people don't need to use a feature, so it shouldn't be there' - regardless of the fact that it's fucking optional and it has VERY REAL uses?
God damn. Just don't use it and quit bitching. When did anybody make it your problem what other people did?
That assumes the product in question is useful. You missed my sentence about 'genuinely don't need'.
A good salesman will always have a job. No matter how cynical you or I may be, there are always interesting, out of the box technologies and inventions that need to be sold to people that previously wouldn't have needed. Electricity was great, but people had gas for light and mules for labor without any of that dangerous magic coming into their house and starting fires
But then there are lots of products that pretty much aren't useful to anybody. That's why people hate marketers - the loudest ones are for things like the 'almighty cleanse', mixing religion with fake (and probably dangerous) medicine. That's why marketers are hated - selling crap that nobody needs to people who don't know any better.
It's a lot like lawyers - the loudest are hated for being sleazeballs, while good lawyers like NYCL are a breath of fresh air. Both are necessary evils, to some extent.
At some level, it was only a matter of time: put the molecules together in the right order, and (generally) the form the right shape when left to fold by themselves.
But synthesis of enzymes and such has interesting ramifications for medicine (can't think of any enzyme-deficient diseases off the top of my head, but there must be some)
Now what would be *really* interesting is if they could do proteins in general. That would open up a whole world of life-saving drugs.
Google is successful because dealings with them don't repeatedly leave a bad taste in the mouth. Microsoft (Vista aside) generally starts out pretty well, yes it's easy to do the usual stuff etc. But try and do anything more complex, it's difficult or impossible and support is essentially nonexistent.
Google has managed to retain the feel of a bunch of nerds cranking out cool stuff from a garage somewhere (Google Labs helps here). Microsoft feels like a monolithic faceless entity. Everybody's had problems with Windows, and it's never fixed.
If Google can continue to stay at the cutting edge of stuff with voluntary (not reactionary) additions of features for cheap or free, they will stay at the top. There's always a market for ads.
Microsoft hasn't been proactive in years (some would say never). I used Compiz on a Intel 855GM about a year and a half before Vista came out, and it worked great. That's not bleeding-edge on Microsoft's part, and bleeding-edge is necessary for a major tech company.
Of course it's not evil. What you described is a simple conversation - but I've only met about 5 marketers that are that honest and frank.
He's talking more about something like Vista: marketing thought it would be awesome if it looked pretty, etc. So it got delayed, time was spent working on the graphics so cool tech like WinFS wasn't implemented, and we're all left with something that marketing can go 'ooh, shiny' at. Aside from the fact that nobody's life was ever made easier because of graphics, and would have been made easier by the slightly less flashy tech.
If you're writing and selling something that people genuinely don't need and you need to 'convince' them to buy it... you're making the wrong thing. Plain and simple. A good product sells itself through logic and (just enough) advertising to make its name known
Because this is slashdot, here's a car analogy: I make a car with 10 cupholders and a 2-cylinder engine. It gets 3 miles to the gallon, if you're lucky. But it has built-in 115VAC outlets.
That car company doesn't deserve to stay in business. And if you took part in that, you should've realized that it was a stupid idea. You don't have a right to sell a product that nobody needs. There are plenty of things that people actually could use, make those.
Slashdot Mirror
As a society, we need to realize that criminals or 'outcasts' (for whatever reason) can be extraordinarily intelligent. As a society, we need to learn how to harness their skills.
Frank Abagnale (the main character of said movie) turns from a check-forger into a designer of secure checks... by using his knowledge of what's hard to forge. We're all better off as a result.
There was a kid a couple of months ago who had the creative and technical skill to make a CounterStrike map of his school. I sure as hell can't do that. Now instead of letting him do an independent study in game design or 3d modeling, or even teach a class (after school or whatever), they sent him to a 'special' school (where they send all the stupid bullies).
We need to give people who possess this intelligence another outlet.... otherwise they'll continue to eat our lunch. Being on the wrong side of the law is obviously more interesting, which is presumably the appeal - a Google-style approach of 'work on cool projects on a flexible schedule' ought to keep them interested enough to do productive work.
Um, you say no and ask for a warrant?
See: Quest.
Nothing happened. At least not publically (the ceo alleges that a contract was canceled)
you hit on it with your last thing.
Valve knows how to make really good looking games. See portal or TF2, or even better EP2.
However, those games will still run fine on a DX8 card if you turn down the settings. And the other Source games (not the source 07 games) will run on dx7 just fine.
It's something I've never figured out. Hell, even Halo 1 (PC) degraded nicely. Give gamers something they can play, and let it grow with their hardware.
That's funny, because the only bug I've ever reported (if you've moderated a discussion, you couldn't post using the D2) got fixed within the week and is currently working.
If this can consistently crash my computer regardless of OS or browser, I'd sure as hell update my BIOS.
This is a big deal.
Exactly. There's absolutely no way that a processor could ever be made to be updated. It's not like those X86 instructions are implemented in code or anything. Hah. What would they call that, microcode or something? Completely stupid. :P
People using linux are (by definition) not using because it's popular, because it's not.
Let's be frank. There are some things that open-source isn't good at (see user interface design). Any pragmatic user is going to use the best tools for the job. In this case, going by the article, the example is Skype.
In another case, the best tool may be Firefox (over Internet Explorer). This is the reverse, and again it's (to many people) the best tool for the job.
I've never really understood the debate here. Yes, it would be great if the whole desktop could be open-source. But any realistic user (read: not a zealot) is going to use the best tool for the job (and so will I)
So by all means, work on replacements for Skype, graphics card drivers, and the like. There will always be people who like to write code and reverse-engineer and I say more power to them. Just let the rest of us use what works.
It's like going with an appliance (that is less efficient and less featured) just because it has schematics. Most people just use what works best.
For a distro like Ubuntu, which is supposed to work out of the box, this means closed-source. It's still a monstrous improvement over Windows.
some deep humor
Like that? :p
Ah well, we're both useless...
Of course there would be problems with an airship based on skyhooks.
Jeez
(Score:5, Informative)
Only on slashdot...
A points system would make sense. You have 20 points, set them among gaming, websurfing, VoIP, email (bittorrent and FTP aren't interactive, so they always use idle bandwith)
But I'm not an ISP.
Or allow the user to define their QoS. Or let the user's equipment define the QoS. Or allow the option of turning it off.
If their network damages one set of users when another set is using BitTorrent, it's not set up right.
That and the fact that even if they did want to throttle BitTorrent to benefit VoIP, sending RSTs is not the way to do it. You just speed and queue-limit it like every other QoS implementation does
That's the kind of glue I meant - an extra device-specific (probably vendor-specific) database. By using a 'commodity' OS that already-written software can be used on...
And assuming the network is closed, allowing anonymous access to query against a SKU and getting the price isn't a risk. You only need to authenticate (with the employee ID/PIN) at the POS terminal to update sales.
The same module could be used at both, assuming the price-checkers and the POS terminals are running Windows. Just code the frontends. The price-checkers have a subset of the functionality, so just disable what is unused...
I should go into the POS business.
I was in a Macys (long story) and ran across a price scanner. These are little gadgets with the SKU reader to tell you the price of an item, but they also had a card-reader tacked on to tell you the remaining balance.
I walked past one and saw this: http://img55.imageshack.us/my.php?image=0710082036ib1.jpg
Yes, a Windows XP desktop. The taskbar was barely visible, but off to the bottom. Internet Explorer, Recycle Bin, and My Computer were there.
This got me thinking. Why would people use such a complicated system with so many parts and so much bloat... to look up a SKU?
The best answer I can come up with is that store maintainers want to keep this data in one format. I can imagine that the server has a SQL table of the names/SKUs/prices/sales/etc, and the registers can run querys against it. It would be easiest to make your devices query the same database - no glue necessary.
Still, wouldn't some form of Linux be more suitable? The kernel can be stripped down to remove everything not necessary (all mouse and keyboard input, sound, all other network adapters and graphics cards), while still allowing the same functionality.
So I understand why they did it. I still cringe when I think the power that thing must have... just for its simplistic function.
In theory, there's a distinct upper bound on the number of cases they can bring without a radical change in tactics. There are only so many judges, and it seems like a large percentage (if not a majority) are unhappy/made aware about their tricks. They will be on the lookout the next time they have a case brought to them.
Or is the churn in judges enough that they can always take it to a new, fresh judge?
Even in that case, you have to figure that their acts get around. If it's on Slashdot, you can be sure the judges are talking to each other or something.
So don't use it asshole. You're not forced to setting this functionality up on install.
Or are you actually enough of a dick to be saying 'well most people don't need to use a feature, so it shouldn't be there' - regardless of the fact that it's fucking optional and it has VERY REAL uses?
God damn. Just don't use it and quit bitching. When did anybody make it your problem what other people did?
You have a point, but I received an infected Word file from a customer just a couple years ago.
When the contract is a few million bucks, you suck it up and run AV and don't tell them how to run their business.
When the contract is a few million bucks, you get a little annoyed at their carelessness potentially damaging your network.
I just can't think of a way to do this on a mass scale. If anyone else has an idea, I'd love to hear it!
Slashdot?
That assumes the product in question is useful. You missed my sentence about 'genuinely don't need'.
A good salesman will always have a job. No matter how cynical you or I may be, there are always interesting, out of the box technologies and inventions that need to be sold to people that previously wouldn't have needed. Electricity was great, but people had gas for light and mules for labor without any of that dangerous magic coming into their house and starting fires
But then there are lots of products that pretty much aren't useful to anybody. That's why people hate marketers - the loudest ones are for things like the 'almighty cleanse', mixing religion with fake (and probably dangerous) medicine. That's why marketers are hated - selling crap that nobody needs to people who don't know any better.
It's a lot like lawyers - the loudest are hated for being sleazeballs, while good lawyers like NYCL are a breath of fresh air. Both are necessary evils, to some extent.
At some level, it was only a matter of time: put the molecules together in the right order, and (generally) the form the right shape when left to fold by themselves.
But synthesis of enzymes and such has interesting ramifications for medicine (can't think of any enzyme-deficient diseases off the top of my head, but there must be some)
Now what would be *really* interesting is if they could do proteins in general. That would open up a whole world of life-saving drugs.
Google is successful because dealings with them don't repeatedly leave a bad taste in the mouth. Microsoft (Vista aside) generally starts out pretty well, yes it's easy to do the usual stuff etc. But try and do anything more complex, it's difficult or impossible and support is essentially nonexistent.
Google has managed to retain the feel of a bunch of nerds cranking out cool stuff from a garage somewhere (Google Labs helps here). Microsoft feels like a monolithic faceless entity. Everybody's had problems with Windows, and it's never fixed.
If Google can continue to stay at the cutting edge of stuff with voluntary (not reactionary) additions of features for cheap or free, they will stay at the top. There's always a market for ads.
Microsoft hasn't been proactive in years (some would say never). I used Compiz on a Intel 855GM about a year and a half before Vista came out, and it worked great. That's not bleeding-edge on Microsoft's part, and bleeding-edge is necessary for a major tech company.
Of course it's not evil. What you described is a simple conversation - but I've only met about 5 marketers that are that honest and frank.
He's talking more about something like Vista: marketing thought it would be awesome if it looked pretty, etc. So it got delayed, time was spent working on the graphics so cool tech like WinFS wasn't implemented, and we're all left with something that marketing can go 'ooh, shiny' at. Aside from the fact that nobody's life was ever made easier because of graphics, and would have been made easier by the slightly less flashy tech.
If you're writing and selling something that people genuinely don't need and you need to 'convince' them to buy it... you're making the wrong thing. Plain and simple. A good product sells itself through logic and (just enough) advertising to make its name known
Because this is slashdot, here's a car analogy:
I make a car with 10 cupholders and a 2-cylinder engine. It gets 3 miles to the gallon, if you're lucky. But it has built-in 115VAC outlets.
That car company doesn't deserve to stay in business. And if you took part in that, you should've realized that it was a stupid idea. You don't have a right to sell a product that nobody needs. There are plenty of things that people actually could use, make those.
Wait... is she talking about some V1@GR@ scam here?