I'm not entirely familiar with the terms of the GPL, but would it be possible for someone else to read the source, document the system independently, and then provide that documentation for free?
Sure. And at that point, you probably have a better manual than the one that the company produces. And you can share the information. If I were a user, I'd buy that manual instead of the company's crappy proprietary support membership.
If I were these guys, I'd remove the non-disclosure clause, pronto.
I also think it is a bit unfair for you to assert that we are violating the spirit of open source by selling said manual.
Of course, selling the manual is a completely different matter. What they're doing isn't selling the manual; they're selling the manual and then telling you that you can't share the information.
These guys are shooting themselves in the foot. The main strength of open-source software is that open source empowers the user community. By segmenting the user community into those who pay vs. those who don't, one hobbles a large segment of the user community. It doesn't help, either, that someone publicized their behavior on Slashdot.
This is an excellent article. Now, try explaining to the HR person looking at LISP or OCAML on your resume (one of hundreds) why the article is right, before s/he tosses it in the circular file for lacking the requisite five years of Visual Basic experience.
As far as non-programmers are concerned, the article may as well be arguing the number of angels that can fit on the head of a pin. And that is why this field has suddenly become very unpleasant for a lot of us who love it.
To the "younger" posters commenting on not being "seasoned". I feel for you. You don't get "seasoned" overnight. You take your beatings, figure out better ways and learn from your mistakes (or better yet, from someone else's!). Volunteer for the hard tasks. Learn things outside what your job requires of you. No matter how qualified you think you are, you still need to solve the same problem 100 times before you can say your an expert on it. Pay your dues.
This is excellent advice. The problem, of course, is that us younger whippersnappers may not get the opportunity to continue working in this profession. If you're working full-time at Wal-Mart and a second job part at McDonald's to make ends meet, it's awfully hard to write enough free software to get that seasoning. At that point, you either have to start your own company (not consulting business), go back go school (and accumulate debt) in the hopes that more education will help make up for lack of experience, or switch careers.
Honestly, I think a lot of good software engineers are going to have their careers strangled in the crib simply because they got into the profession at the wrong time. I understand that this is the nature of the business, but that doesn't make it any less of a shame.
I guess, for me, the problem is that I really haven't had enough time to become a "seasoned" software engineer. This is why I'm presently contemplating changing professions, from code slinging to robotics. My career needs a fresh start.
How many people have lost their lives because they didn't realize the saftey lock was on, compared to how many lives the saftey has saved. That's all this is, a new mechanism to make guns safer.
I doubt anyone has real numbers on lives saved by gun safeties, since gun safeties are ill-defined. Technically a life is saved by a safeties whenever someone accidentally sweeps someone else with their gun, because the "internal safeties" prevented a freaky accidental discharge.
I know for a fact, however, that an owner-id based lock isn't a typical mechanical lock. It's an electronic device that requires either a password or some kind of biometric data, or both. Try entering a password on a tiny keypad when you're under attack and tenths of a second make the difference. Also, something looking for biometric data is going to have to rely on (probably somewhat flakey) pattern-recognition software. When a false negative means that the weapon won't fire, the potential harm is very great indeed.
Unless I can trust the owner identification device to allow me to fire under the most stressful of conditions (e.g., situations where I'm facing possible death), I'm better off sticking to my "dumb" guns. A "dumb" $100.38 special police trade-in that shoots when I need it to, is better than a "smart" $1000 1911A1.45 ACP that might shoot when I need it to.
Aside from the Desert Eagles (mentioned above), there are also.357 Magnum revolvers that hold seven or even eight rounds in the cylander, and lever-action rifles chambered for.357 magnum.
Have you ever had a serious conversation with a 5 year old? He will know it's "bad" to play with the gun, but he cannot understand "accidental death", "shattered families", etc.
S/he can, however, understand that guns are really scary things that make lots of loud noise, cause a lot of pain, crying, hospitals, doctors, and will make mommy and daddy very, very upset and angry. And that you're never, ever to touch them.
Five year olds can also understand the four basic rules of gun safety, if you drill them into their heads.
Thanks:) I'm well aware that the Bible condones sexual activity under certain circumstances. My main concern is with the near-hysteria I'm finding surrounding the Sanctity of Marriage. The idea that a mere sheet of paper (the marriage license) somehow magically distinguishes between okay and not-okay sex is ridiculous on its face. The real marriage takes place long before then, and often in forms that we don't see right away.
Of course, I'm looking at things from a slightly different viewpoint, perhaps, than Paul.
"Love is the Law, Love under Will," and all that.
You must be some kinda commie pinko satanic islamic atheist terorist, promoting a site like that.
God didn't intend for anyone to have sex unless that sex is sanctioned by the Church and the State through the sanctity of a marriage contract. It says so in Exodus and Leviticus and in the Epistles. This is why we need to make sex outside of marriage a capital crime, punishable by firing squad.
This is the new America under Christ and George W Bush. Get with the program.
So, anybody gonna be hiring in the Portland area in a couple months?
Stream, XO, Powell's, Wal-Mart, Plaid Pantry, Fred Meyer....
Oh, you want a high-paying IT job? Better start thinking about your own business, and I don't mean consulting. It's death valley for IT in Oregon right now.
Better yet, go with a local computer store, one that assembles boxes themselves. The price is a little more, but you can make sure that it uses good parts, and if you tell them flat out that you're installing Linux on the box they won't bother you about XP.
Hell, some shops won't do anything *but* Linux. Linux General Store in Atlanta was like this.
I think this is a great idea. In addition, let's make these licenses reciprocal in all states: a gun-owner's license in Oregon is a valid gun-owner's license in Illinois, California, New York, Massechusetts, DC...
Maybe we can also make this apply to concealed carry permits.:)
I'm starting to get the impression that telephones might not have yet been installed in the Hollywood section of California.
That's not true. There's one working public phone in the Hollywood area, I think it's on Yucca and Argyle, and it works about half the time. You'll find it near the laundromat where people buy crap out of a closet, within walking distance of the burnt-out remains of Fredrick's of Hollywood.
FWIW, I had an HP for six years and it never screwed up on me. The only thing I had to replace on it was the modem, once I installed Red Hat 5.1. I just bought a new box (hey, it pays to upgrade to get an order of magnatude performance improvement) and donated the old box to my church, where it will probably work as our web server for the next few years.
Compaqs are pure crap; on this much we can agree. But thus far I've had positive experiences with HPs.
Assuming that computers continue to get twice as fast every 1.5 years, and that we start with a set of computers, right now, that could crack RC5-64 in a year, then the RC5-72 project should be finished in 12 years.
Slashdot Mirror
Sure. And at that point, you probably have a better manual than the one that the company produces. And you can share the information. If I were a user, I'd buy that manual instead of the company's crappy proprietary support membership.
If I were these guys, I'd remove the non-disclosure clause, pronto.
Quoting Sarah from the list:
Of course, selling the manual is a completely different matter. What they're doing isn't selling the manual; they're selling the manual and then telling you that you can't share the information.
These guys are shooting themselves in the foot. The main strength of open-source software is that open source empowers the user community. By segmenting the user community into those who pay vs. those who don't, one hobbles a large segment of the user community. It doesn't help, either, that someone publicized their behavior on Slashdot.
I certainly hope they "get it," sharpish.
Then again, I haven't tried Eclipse yet, so this is just a guess.
As far as non-programmers are concerned, the article may as well be arguing the number of angels that can fit on the head of a pin. And that is why this field has suddenly become very unpleasant for a lot of us who love it.
This is excellent advice. The problem, of course, is that us younger whippersnappers may not get the opportunity to continue working in this profession. If you're working full-time at Wal-Mart and a second job part at McDonald's to make ends meet, it's awfully hard to write enough free software to get that seasoning. At that point, you either have to start your own company (not consulting business), go back go school (and accumulate debt) in the hopes that more education will help make up for lack of experience, or switch careers.
Honestly, I think a lot of good software engineers are going to have their careers strangled in the crib simply because they got into the profession at the wrong time. I understand that this is the nature of the business, but that doesn't make it any less of a shame.
I guess, for me, the problem is that I really haven't had enough time to become a "seasoned" software engineer. This is why I'm presently contemplating changing professions, from code slinging to robotics. My career needs a fresh start.
And then there's consulting, which, frankly, I see going down the tubes along with the rest of the software engineering field.
VS.NET obviously won't work on Linux, but SharpDevelop is on the way...
How many people have lost their lives because they didn't realize the saftey lock was on, compared to how many lives the saftey has saved. That's all this is, a new mechanism to make guns safer.
I doubt anyone has real numbers on lives saved by gun safeties, since gun safeties are ill-defined. Technically a life is saved by a safeties whenever someone accidentally sweeps someone else with their gun, because the "internal safeties" prevented a freaky accidental discharge.
I know for a fact, however, that an owner-id based lock isn't a typical mechanical lock. It's an electronic device that requires either a password or some kind of biometric data, or both. Try entering a password on a tiny keypad when you're under attack and tenths of a second make the difference. Also, something looking for biometric data is going to have to rely on (probably somewhat flakey) pattern-recognition software. When a false negative means that the weapon won't fire, the potential harm is very great indeed.
Unless I can trust the owner identification device to allow me to fire under the most stressful of conditions (e.g., situations where I'm facing possible death), I'm better off sticking to my "dumb" guns. A "dumb" $100 .38 special police trade-in that shoots when I need it to, is better than a "smart" $1000 1911A1 .45 ACP that might shoot when I need it to.
Aside from the Desert Eagles (mentioned above), there are also .357 Magnum revolvers that hold seven or even eight rounds in the cylander, and lever-action rifles chambered for .357 magnum.
The dead person's relatives can, and probably will, sue. And frankly, if I use a gun in self-defense, I expect this, and I expect it to be expensive.
Have you ever had a serious conversation with a 5 year old? He will know it's "bad" to play with the gun, but he cannot understand "accidental death", "shattered families", etc.
S/he can, however, understand that guns are really scary things that make lots of loud noise, cause a lot of pain, crying, hospitals, doctors, and will make mommy and daddy very, very upset and angry. And that you're never, ever to touch them.
Five year olds can also understand the four basic rules of gun safety, if you drill them into their heads.
Of course, I'm looking at things from a slightly different viewpoint, perhaps, than Paul. "Love is the Law, Love under Will," and all that.
<sarcasm>
You must be some kinda commie pinko satanic islamic atheist terorist, promoting a site like that.
God didn't intend for anyone to have sex unless that sex is sanctioned by the Church and the State through the sanctity of a marriage contract. It says so in Exodus and Leviticus and in the Epistles. This is why we need to make sex outside of marriage a capital crime, punishable by firing squad.
This is the new America under Christ and George W Bush. Get with the program.
<\sarcasm>
Stream, XO, Powell's, Wal-Mart, Plaid Pantry, Fred Meyer ....
Oh, you want a high-paying IT job? Better start thinking about your own business, and I don't mean consulting. It's death valley for IT in Oregon right now.
Don't laugh. It's actually starting to happen.
Hell, some shops won't do anything *but* Linux. Linux General Store in Atlanta was like this.
If nothing else, it would give all the unemployed geeks here something to do...
It doesn't sound like much, but for porting a lot of business logic to Linux, this is a potentially huge development.
Another thing that's needed to get this project up to par with MS .NET is an IDE. Fortunately, the SharpDevelop
folks are working on that...
So far this project has been very impressive. Kudos to the Ximian folx.
Maybe we can also make this apply to concealed carry permits. :)
Note on ESR's article: one notable place where the GNU style is found is in Sedgewick's second edition of Algorithms in C++.
Bruce Campbell? Please. If you ask me, this set of "answers" by Jon Vranesevich is by far the worst of all.
That's not true. There's one working public phone in the Hollywood area, I think it's on Yucca and Argyle, and it works about half the time. You'll find it near the laundromat where people buy crap out of a closet, within walking distance of the burnt-out remains of Fredrick's of Hollywood.
Compaqs are pure crap; on this much we can agree. But thus far I've had positive experiences with HPs.
2^(t/1.5) = 256
(t/1.5) = log_2 (256) = 8
t = 8 * 1.5 = 12.