If you haven't seen something which wasn't just "incremental advance" in the last ten years, what have we seen in the last 200 hears which wasn't simply "incremental advance"?
"cloud-based" computing (to use an unnecessary buzzword) in general I think will be the next step forward. That is, the basic concept of "we were doing things with one big thing, now we want to do it with lots of little things" still has several iterations to go through before I'd call that area developed, and I expect that that sort of change in regards to how things are generally thought about will have major impact on what I would consider to be the "core" of I.T.
if you think the "core" of IT has evolved as far as it can go, you're wrong. Sure, it's all unimplemented ideas from 1987 and earlier, but they're still out there
he was not roaming, his phone was roaming. That's the point. Too often it's just accepted with a shrug and an "oh well!" that when some component of a service already being paid for (mobile, electricity, water) fails, often one which the customer is contractually obligated not to tamper with, it is the customer who gets stuck with the bill.
This falls under the same category as "City doesn't notice for five years that they have a broken pipe, city bills Joe Random who owns the building over the pipe $6,000,000" in my book
I don't know much about TOR, but isn't it intentionally inefficient by design? Wouldn't the bittorrent protocol just blindly detect the inefficiency and not route much traffic to that node?
my hotspot has DHCP, but just like every other DHCP server in the world, it doesn't collect any information related to the "identity of the user", it just gives out IP addresses. Do one thing, do it well.
Voting is not a contest, it's a statistic. Every vote "counts" because every vote is a registration of a single person's opinion. America is set up to give the majority opinion a voice.
If you don't hold the majority opinion, you will not be represented. But that doesn't mean that the act of taking a poll to find out "what exactly IS the current majority opinion?" is itself invalid.
The idea that the votes of the "losing side" somehow count less is absurd whining.
Why "if we hadn't gotten there first"? There's not much reason to suspect that if non-carbon-based life is possible on Earth, it won't remain possible long after we're gone
using javascript for links, menus, and layout, would be "not valid uses" if there were sane alternatives. There are not.
- links have no soft "often preferred as a popup window" hint. Using a "floating div" tends to be a good way, but of course this means have a "javascript link"
- buttons are so ugly that people overload anchors to act like buttons. Yes, buttons are probably the best element for the job in many cases, but they're ugly, so they won't be used.
- CSS is a horrible hack which doesn't provide enough functionality to cover most basic uses without at least some tweaking. This covers both the "layout" and "menus" thing. CSS sucks. We only use it because there is no better alternative.
In short: everything sucks, javascript is powerful enough to hold everything together just enough to give us basic functionality. Use javascript.
You don't, but you certainly have a right to tell absolutely anyone that you know someone who has watched Underworld 3 without having to pay rental fees at Blockbuster.
"spotted" does not equate to "corrected", though. It's a truism that the number of bugs in any bug tracker only increases, never decreases, and that the ones that actually cause problems were either unknown until they caused problems or were considered not-important-enough-to-fix-yet.
Linux gets around this problem by not having a bug tracker, so there's no way to know what issues still exist. Therefor, it has no bugs.
my old PC in 1992 could only "handle" about two or three full-blown applications at a time. So: I didn't run more than two or three at a time.
But if every now and then, I needed to open five different things, I/could/. It was slow to the point of being unworkable, but I never got a "You can only run three of these" message. An "out of memory" error sometimes (I get those plenty today, too), but never "we've hard-coded something, sucks to be you."
Ah, so now I know what to call those things that CONSTANTLY break no matter where I've seen them used.
A power supply that relies on:
- A tiny flap of bent metal to actually make contact
- A very tiny peg to guide the plug into the right place
always winds up with:
- A tiny flap of slightly less bent than it needs to be metal
- A very tiny very broken guiding peg
It's a nice distinction in a design for anyone to have NEVER seen a non-broken one, I think. Of course, I've seen a fair share of broken USB ports (again, a little plastic guiding peg), but I think I'd call both of these failures.
I've yet to be in an enterprise which uses enterprise-level change control.
Working for one of the world's largest commercial companies: Closest thing to "source control" was a rigorous automated backup process across network shares.
Working for a small commercial company which sold commercial data processing tools for some of the world's largest commercial companies, and the U.S. Military, and various parts of the U.S. Government: Closest thing to "source control" was laws requiring our code be held in escrow for every release. We routinely released completely untested versions and claimed that it was a re-build of the same sources. Eventually management was convinced to start using source control after asking if anyone had an old copy of a file lying around and I quickly produced it from my local repository. Just before I left, I brought up the issue of segmentation faults and memory corruption, and was told "we can't avoid signalling if we're given bad inputs".
Working for possibly the largest I.T. Company in the world, processing data for the U.S. Government: One person in charge of source control. No branching allowed. Occasionally heard complaints from the guru that people were overwriting each-other's changes. Never heard the word "security" mentioned at any point. Found out I could get a root shell and modify anyone else's source code by passing bad parameters to the reporting system.
pics or it didn't happen. I've heard these claims of "But it was too hot to immediately drink!" before and researched it, and I've never seen anything claiming it "melted the cup". That would be a McDonalds coffee cup, by the way. Those tend to be made of paper.
I've never seen coffee, tea, or cocoa brewed which I would consider fit for immediate consumption. Everyone else in the world realizes that it comes out "hot. Too hot to drink". And when they accidentally spill it on themselves, and require hospitalization because of it, they think "ouch. That really was too hot to drink!". Not, "ouch. That really was too hot to drink, how dare it be sold to me!"
So.. do you want me to print out this thing and mark up changes with a crayon?
What possible legitimate reason could there be for not using plain text? I would expect the only reason to use PDF is to discourage people from actually looking at the code, which is poorly-written and full of commented-out code as if you haven't even heard of version control.
After skimming through the code I immediately went to "contact us" thinking I'd beg to be added to the project, if only they'd let me clean up that horrible file- that's when I saw that the whole site was set up like a "I've got this neat idea" business looking for some gullible investors.
Seriously, though, I'll do what I can to help you out if you'll let me fix that file. I'm not good at what I do, but I'm good enough at this to keep my LSL files in plain text, or to leave dead code commented out in the middle of a file.
Slashdot Mirror
tell that to everyone else who uses this common metaphor regularly
If you haven't seen something which wasn't just "incremental advance" in the last ten years, what have we seen in the last 200 hears which wasn't simply "incremental advance"?
"cloud-based" computing (to use an unnecessary buzzword) in general I think will be the next step forward. That is, the basic concept of "we were doing things with one big thing, now we want to do it with lots of little things" still has several iterations to go through before I'd call that area developed, and I expect that that sort of change in regards to how things are generally thought about will have major impact on what I would consider to be the "core" of I.T.
February 2009 - Present: Unemployed
vs
February 2009 - Present: Full-time contributor to [insert your itch here]
if you think the "core" of IT has evolved as far as it can go, you're wrong. Sure, it's all unimplemented ideas from 1987 and earlier, but they're still out there
he was not roaming, his phone was roaming. That's the point. Too often it's just accepted with a shrug and an "oh well!" that when some component of a service already being paid for (mobile, electricity, water) fails, often one which the customer is contractually obligated not to tamper with, it is the customer who gets stuck with the bill.
This falls under the same category as "City doesn't notice for five years that they have a broken pipe, city bills Joe Random who owns the building over the pipe $6,000,000" in my book
I don't know much about TOR, but isn't it intentionally inefficient by design? Wouldn't the bittorrent protocol just blindly detect the inefficiency and not route much traffic to that node?
How dare GNOME bundle nautilus instead of firefox!!
my hotspot has DHCP, but just like every other DHCP server in the world, it doesn't collect any information related to the "identity of the user", it just gives out IP addresses. Do one thing, do it well.
Voting is not a contest, it's a statistic.
Every vote "counts" because every vote is a registration of a single person's opinion. America is set up to give the majority opinion a voice.
If you don't hold the majority opinion, you will not be represented. But that doesn't mean that the act of taking a poll to find out "what exactly IS the current majority opinion?" is itself invalid.
The idea that the votes of the "losing side" somehow count less is absurd whining.
Yes, this was also true under Bush.
Why "if we hadn't gotten there first"? There's not much reason to suspect that if non-carbon-based life is possible on Earth, it won't remain possible long after we're gone
using javascript for links, menus, and layout, would be "not valid uses" if there were sane alternatives. There are not.
- links have no soft "often preferred as a popup window" hint. Using a "floating div" tends to be a good way, but of course this means have a "javascript link"
- buttons are so ugly that people overload anchors to act like buttons. Yes, buttons are probably the best element for the job in many cases, but they're ugly, so they won't be used.
- CSS is a horrible hack which doesn't provide enough functionality to cover most basic uses without at least some tweaking. This covers both the "layout" and "menus" thing. CSS sucks. We only use it because there is no better alternative.
In short: everything sucks, javascript is powerful enough to hold everything together just enough to give us basic functionality. Use javascript.
You don't, but you certainly have a right to tell absolutely anyone that you know someone who has watched Underworld 3 without having to pay rental fees at Blockbuster.
Surely there's some way of finding out who inserted what into a bill. Just look for a list of changes made by Feinstein.
yeah, that Inauguration thing was so thinly covered by so few sites, people without Silverlight were really left out in the cold for that one
"spotted" does not equate to "corrected", though.
It's a truism that the number of bugs in any bug tracker only increases, never decreases, and that the ones that actually cause problems were either unknown until they caused problems or were considered not-important-enough-to-fix-yet.
Linux gets around this problem by not having a bug tracker, so there's no way to know what issues still exist. Therefor, it has no bugs.
my old PC in 1992 could only "handle" about two or three full-blown applications at a time. So: I didn't run more than two or three at a time.
But if every now and then, I needed to open five different things, I /could/. It was slow to the point of being unworkable, but I never got a "You can only run three of these" message. An "out of memory" error sometimes (I get those plenty today, too), but never "we've hard-coded something, sucks to be you."
Ah, so now I know what to call those things that CONSTANTLY break no matter where I've seen them used.
A power supply that relies on:
- A tiny flap of bent metal to actually make contact
- A very tiny peg to guide the plug into the right place
always winds up with:
- A tiny flap of slightly less bent than it needs to be metal
- A very tiny very broken guiding peg
It's a nice distinction in a design for anyone to have NEVER seen a non-broken one, I think. Of course, I've seen a fair share of broken USB ports (again, a little plastic guiding peg), but I think I'd call both of these failures.
What's your SL name?
Because they, like every other sane person, does not directly manage their web server, or likely even directly manage their web site.
The "if you don't like open source, why is the thing your opinions are posted on using open source!" argument is dead, because it is so stupid.
only a couple of days? I've been versioning various things for years and /still/ don't know what I actually want to do with it :)
I've yet to be in an enterprise which uses enterprise-level change control.
Working for one of the world's largest commercial companies: Closest thing to "source control" was a rigorous automated backup process across network shares.
Working for a small commercial company which sold commercial data processing tools for some of the world's largest commercial companies, and the U.S. Military, and various parts of the U.S. Government: Closest thing to "source control" was laws requiring our code be held in escrow for every release. We routinely released completely untested versions and claimed that it was a re-build of the same sources. Eventually management was convinced to start using source control after asking if anyone had an old copy of a file lying around and I quickly produced it from my local repository. Just before I left, I brought up the issue of segmentation faults and memory corruption, and was told "we can't avoid signalling if we're given bad inputs".
Working for possibly the largest I.T. Company in the world, processing data for the U.S. Government: One person in charge of source control. No branching allowed. Occasionally heard complaints from the guru that people were overwriting each-other's changes. Never heard the word "security" mentioned at any point. Found out I could get a root shell and modify anyone else's source code by passing bad parameters to the reporting system.
pics or it didn't happen. I've heard these claims of "But it was too hot to immediately drink!" before and researched it, and I've never seen anything claiming it "melted the cup". That would be a McDonalds coffee cup, by the way. Those tend to be made of paper.
I've never seen coffee, tea, or cocoa brewed which I would consider fit for immediate consumption. Everyone else in the world realizes that it comes out "hot. Too hot to drink". And when they accidentally spill it on themselves, and require hospitalization because of it, they think "ouch. That really was too hot to drink!". Not, "ouch. That really was too hot to drink, how dare it be sold to me!"
I stick ice in my tea, because I'm a pussy.
So.. do you want me to print out this thing and mark up changes with a crayon?
What possible legitimate reason could there be for not using plain text? I would expect the only reason to use PDF is to discourage people from actually looking at the code, which is poorly-written and full of commented-out code as if you haven't even heard of version control.
After skimming through the code I immediately went to "contact us" thinking I'd beg to be added to the project, if only they'd let me clean up that horrible file- that's when I saw that the whole site was set up like a "I've got this neat idea" business looking for some gullible investors.
Seriously, though, I'll do what I can to help you out if you'll let me fix that file. I'm not good at what I do, but I'm good enough at this to keep my LSL files in plain text, or to leave dead code commented out in the middle of a file.
Javascript IS basic functionality. Welcome to 1990.
Good thing I'm on Ubuntu, which asks for the admin password once, and then silently accepts any "sudo" command sent to it- So I'm safe!