What exactly does being a successful, agressive company have to do with being "unjust?" Nobody *has* to use Microsoft now, and nobody hever has.
BLATANT astroturfing completely distorts the facts. You have set up a straw dog. Step 1: put words in your oponent's mouth as if you are speaking on his behalf"being a successful, aggressive company is unjust." Step 2: expose the fallacy in the bogus argument you posed: it is truly a non-sequitur argument and thus invalid.
The problem is that you have put a spin on the argument. Let me correct this Anonymous Coward. You have discredited not only yourself but every other pro-Microsoft Slashdot Anonymous Coward short post.
If not every short pro-Microsoft post on Slashdot by Anonymous Coward is bogus, enough of them are bogus to completely justify ignoring them. The assumption that all pro-Microsoft Anonymous Cowards are malicious is relatively safe; the cost of the cases in which the assumption is wrong is negligible. You have yourself to blame, Anonymous Coward, friend of white-collar criminals, author of foul spin and misleading crap. You chose to lower the signal to noise ratio and your pollution must bear a warning label.
Long live critical thinking skills AT THE EXPENSE OF PROFIT.
How much would you pay me for a port of tip(1)??
tip(1) is BSD software that will allow you to connect stdin/stdout to a serial device (ie./dev/tty.*) so that random software can access it.
I'm going to guess that you will need a Carbon driver wrapper so that classic style apps can use the BSD stdin/stdout or the/dev/tty.* devices. Do you know how MacAuthorize interfaces the modem?
Actually, I would keep Carbon. It just needs to be retooled to better conformance with the Cocoa Aqua interfaces. If they really wanted to make it slick, they could put support in the Carbon classes for the necessary runtime type detection to make them work like the loose-type Objective C objects.
What has to go is the end-user distinction between Carbon and Cocoa apps. Even more than the differences from Cocoa, Carbon should be considered a compatibility layer for OSX. They should flesh it out with minimal QT and GTK compatibility. Then (theoretically) you could run native GIMP and KOffice with a recompile. That would put the spurs to Adobe and get us some new compelling apps!
I have a TiBook. I'm typing on it now. The NeXTStep interface was cleaner than the MacOS Classic interface. The only thing that "dirties" the MacOSX interface is the "classic" look of apps that insist on drawing windows with their own application-specific goofy widgets that are designed to look good taking up all of a blurry 14" CRT screen.
Also, more time in the "lickable" Aqua world, and you will be instantly conscious of the mood altering effects of being surrounded by soft edges and clean surfaces with rich (but understated) textures when you switch back to the cold-hard Classic. It's easy to say "it's all just flash !*blink* *blink*", but you haven't really tasted both samples.
I've used MSWindows 3.0,3.1,95,XP; NextStep; BeOS FVWM, OpenLook, CDE, WindowMaker, AfterStep, Enlightenment, KDE, Sawfish, Black Box; etc.. I prefer the OS-X (still using Jaguar) interface. Keys include a cohesive window-management scheme, and *working* VFS. Also there's transparent terminals that use QuartzExtreme so that I can put a window with documentation under a Terminal.app window and type what I want based on the slightly blurred text underneath. Cocoa's message-passing for loose-types makes for a somewhat bloat-y experience, but it isn't something that scales with hardware. It runs nearly as well on a Grape G3 iMac as it does on my TiBook at twice the clock speed plus AltiVec and 32MB GPU.
That said, MacOSX is a logical continuation of NeXTStep. It is a leap from MacOS Classic. Let me say one thing: it is much less of a leap from Classic to OSX than it is from Classic to MSWindowsXP.
You can continue to run your old Classic apps in MacOS Classic if you like. I invite you to try EBay for an old NeXT cube/slab with some software on it. OSX has definitely met Classic users halfway. If you are so reactionary that you can't bear to part with your good-ol' key combo shortcuts and learn a new style, then you don't deserve to run new software that demands it. That's great if you're a "my own little world" style user who just needs Adobe apps and doesn't need UTF-8 international character support...
The bottom line is that you can hold out and save your money for a compelling personal reason to switch, but if you really want your old OS, the old interface guidelines, etc. it ain't gonna happen. Translating your comments in light of that makes your position sound more like "There are those of us who will never upgrade. Long Live Classic!"
Whatever...
Can you use the vouchers to pay for a family pack of Panther? Does it have to be PC software, or even commercial software, or can you give the money to a GNU project or the FSF?
It's the Big Brother tracking, not the tracking...
on
Reading, Writing, RFID
·
· Score: 1
Children should be kept track of by a teacher with no more students in the classroom than a single teacher can engage at once. Using technology to monitor students is penitentiary infrastructure.
Schools are a place where tchnology should not be viewed as a way to shrink the bottom line while maintaining the same results on paper. Technology has its place in schools, and I'm not against it, but there are human factors that we are simply not up to filling with technology. Good teachers with a personality cannot be replaced as a classroom institution. RFID tags... PLEASE!!!??
Your question is actually more critical of Windows security than the results of the survey: you doubt that the Windows developers surveyed can (or will) actually assess and report software security..
The end result is that either Windows developers know their software is insecure on an insecure platform, or that they are not qualified to make that distinction, and by default their software is untrusted and insecure.
First off, Gator is using lawyers to troll. We need a new term for trolling people into court: using legal threats as an attention getting device. We also need a way to punish people who engage in this kind of abuse of the law.
This is taken directly from Gator's eWallet thingie's (no) Privacy (whatsoever) Statement.
The GAIN AdServer is patent-pending technology that identifies the interests of anonymous computer users based on their computer usage and web surfing behavior, including the URLs of Web pages viewed by users and other criteria but which does not collect ANY personally identifying information. The GAIN AdServer displays GAIN Ads on computer screens on behalf of TGC's advertising clients and not on behalf of the Web site the user may be viewing when the ad appears. TGC's advertising clients may be competitors of the publishers whose Web pages users may be viewing, or may have recently viewed. GAIN Ads are distinguishable from other ads or messages because all GAIN Ads contain the trademark "GAIN" in the title bar and/or the GAIN logo in the ad.
Spyware is software that runs within a person's personal domain, inside those boundaries which the wise people of the USA commonly concieve are protected by the constitution from governmental intrusion. Once active within a person's private domain, this software releases information obtained without giving said person any opportunity to evaluate and veto any particular information released to a second party whose interests may at any time conflict with those of the first party. Since the software acts as an agent on behalf of another party to report information about the first party, it makes sense to say it is a spy. Since it is at the same time a spy and software, the contraction "spyware" can be easily defined as a legal term, and Gator would not escape that legal definition without significantly changing the focus of their business.
Somehow, these people think that if they omit names and social security numbers that they are not violating anyone's privacy. Even if the data is anonymous, if any particular click-through can be linked back to a discrete history of click-throughs, they have created a "glove" identity that will over time be easily matched to any other such collection of data despite the omission of a distinct identifier. It will become a "hand print" which is inseparable from the person who made it. This is sloppy reasoning.
Advertisement is publishing. Gathering data on the targets of that advertisement is marketing. It is not advertisement. Just because one does both does not mean that advertising describes everything that one does. For example, if I enjoy knitting, and I enjoy killing people with knitting needles, is it fair for me to demand people call me a "knitter" and refrain from calling me a murderer?
What will Gator do when a judge calls their software spyware?
This software will probably scrape your hard drive for email addresses and then spam them with your return address, install a DDoS slave and invoke the return of Zuul, Queen of Gozer.
Seriously, you have to download and install the program, then *two* drivers, and tell me (wise ones) you're not nervous about this?
The most dangerous party member.-- In every party there is one who through his all too credulous avowal of the party's principles incites the others to apostasy.
from Nietzsche's Human, all too Human, s.298, R.J. Hollingdale transl. www.pitt.edu:80/~wbcurry/nietzsche/nietzsche.html
Forbes doesn't have much of a news desk given the lack of fact-checking going on. If you use GPL'ed software and you don't want to release source for your binary distributions, you can just find all the copyright holders for all the code you're using and pay them whatever they want for a non-GPL license. The thing that really grinds Forbes' readers' teeth is that the programmers still own the copyrights and not the (hand waving) mystery men behind the corporate veil.
Why is this so bad for Cisco (Linksys) and Broadcom? When you outsource development you have to pay more to own the IP produced by the contractors. The only difference here is that Cisco and Broadcom didn't pay for the development, and the copyright holders now have claims against the license violations. It wasn't in the budget...
The spoiler:
Why should we be glad that Pivx decided that we don't need a single convenient place to catalog the remaining unfixed old IE vulnerabilities? Why should we give them a hand when they are helping Microsoft slack off again and shirk their responsibility to the people who are duped into using the software and later become a victim of an international identity theft?
PS: A job posting doesn't mean they're hiring. An offer letter means they're hiring.
It seems to me that your SMP (Symmetric) kernel could just as easily (with a kernel module or something) become AMP (Asymmetric): creating one class of thread on a particular class of processor. What I mean is the loader would create an executable main memory thread/object tagged for a DSP or a x86 or an AMD64 or PPC processor, and the kernel would be able to execute these tagged objects on specific processors on expansion cards or a remote host or a FC WWPN target or such craziness..
The biggest benefit/drawback that I see is all the Slashdot trolling mirroring/mocking/echoing the "Imagine a Beowulf cluster of these" with "Imagine a Dragonfly cluster of these..." The change will be felt mostly when the pissing contest and flamewar between the trolls' biters resurrect the old Linux/BSD holy war.
I predict this will happen when people figure out how to get the Dragonfly threading/messaging code into NetBSD.
In the old days, people would just quietly update the root zone and cut Verisign's nameservers out entirely. Then the remaining root servers would all filter out wildcard replies. The zone delegations would switch, and as the TTLs expire around the net Verisign would disappear from the DNS business. All this ICANN crap gives Verisign the power to pull crap like this and make legal threats if the rest of the Internet turns their back on them.
What would hapen then? It would be up to the ISPs which usually supply DNS servers in setup configuration guides and via DHCP to decide which servers have the authoritative root zone.
Oh, and BTW: what do you think Verisign has planned down the road? Signed zones? Boosted certificate business?
DNS isn't broken enough to create demand for that kind of technology. DNSSEC has been around for a while and really has almost died. Verisign can almost set themselves up as a taxing authority. Will we let them? Probably. What do you think Legislators would do in this situation? Write the monopoly a charter!! Then, they can carve up the authority between a few big whigs to get out from under the monopoly spectre. Create a dazzling telcom-like illusion of competition. It'll be monopoly pricing without the monopoly!
Quit whining and run your own DNS server. When you are asked, you should willingly pony up the network bandwidth and server load to run a root server.
You'd better get cracking too: there's a lot of RFCs to bone up on before you can achieve the status of the enlightened few who are above the controversy by sheer virtue of pure wisdom.
If all the selfless people made it their livelihood to outproduce the demands of the greedy, would the demand diminish? Greed is foolishness, and a fool is self-defeating. Leave the greedy alone, but show them how to BE happy so that they can see parity from striving for happiness.
You can't sustain a technical solution for a political problem, so leave their forum and create a new one without political problems. Why not just go back to IP addresses? Why not a new distributed database? Signed DNSSEC zones with PGP style peer-reviewed keyrings for certificates? What's the BIG PROBLEM here? The solution is apparent in understanding the problem.
Actually, you might notice a difference: Java might peg all of your CPUs seemingly for no good reason.
Depending on what patch level your Solaris is at, your JVM might be using one OS thread-handling model or another. One apparently makes Java go nuts on the spinlocks, which is less noticable on slower machines. True story of a Solaris support case at work...
If you want to sell more hardware, why would you make a framework that scales well down to smaller, slower hardware? The idea is that the more hardware you throw at it, the better it will run. That is offensive to people whose computing effort isn't directly pulling in revenue. A little bit of cleverness can go a long way, but people who only care about fat paychecks don't understand that kind of long-term thinking. Java is definitely for business: soaking up budgets!!!
Don't be a GUMP. DO NOT WORK FOR FREE. It's a JOB not a HOBBY.
If you kiss enough ass, they'll give you a low-level management position which means signing responsibility with no authority or budget. All you get is the promise of middle management if you can continue to kiss your way up the hierarchy. Now you are responsible for the work that other people do, and there is so much that THEY can't do it all so YOU can't do it by yourself either. If you try to climb the corporate ladder, you will always have someone else's ass in your face: you will always be someone else's bitch. You will be OWNED like the tool that you are.
You will have no control over who you manage, but you will be ENTIRELY reliant on your direct reports. Their failure will be your failure, and you will have no way to influence them except to be an asshole because you will not have discretion over enough company resources to get results the nice way. You must achieve control, or you're going to recieve the sum of your staff's bad reviews. Being the new guy you will prolly get the scrub staff that nobody else wants. You'll have to kiss their asses too sometimes.
As for this:
As well, if you are consistently early for work, your employers will take note, and will be impressed by your attitude and willingness to get started with your work!
Are you autistic? Do you understand the words that you are saying? Are you reciting the employee manual verbatim? Do you realize that if anyone hears you say this crap outside the scope of an HR job you will be branded a fool and laughed at behind your back? People will like you at work if they HAVE TO because they get ADDICTED to the services you provide. You are the pusher and your boss is the junkie. Repeat that. Deliver. Repeat...
Being CONSCIENTIOUSLY late to work is TIME MANAGEMENT. Actually: you're on time if you accomplish what you promised to the people who are asking for your effort. As an employee, you must DRAW THE LINE to balance the priorities between your personal life and your job. If you fail to do this you are a WAGE SLAVE. You must not allow your job to expect too much for you to keep your personal life on track. YOU must manage the expectations. YOU must set the goals that YOU can deliver.
Familiarize yourself with the FLSA (if you live in the US), and avail yourself of your rights. Know that the overtime exemption for computer workers does not apply to jobs where you have no DISCRETIONARY POWERS. Usually DISCRETIONARY POWERS are interpereted that they necessarily include the discretion to come and go as you deem necessary in order to fulfil your professional responsibilities. If you do not have DISCRETIONARY POWERS to decide how to fulfil those responsibilities, then you are NOT EXEMPT FROM OVERTIME.
Get a Lawyer. Work your 50 hours. Record them carefully in a little book, and get someone on the level to initial the enties. Send your payroll department a notice of the unpayed wages. If you can't get results without involving the lawyer charge them a late fee to cover legal costs incurred in collecting what you were legally owed anyway.
How about banning cellphones laptops and games just in case you have a marketing partnership for in-flight communications/entertainment/advertising services? Nothing like a captive audience to drum up advertising bucks for those poor ailing airline companies!
If planes went haywire during sunspots and solar flares the FAA would require them to be properly shielded or use fiber optics or something. Why not demand that they use fiber optics for flight-systems instead of antiquated and vulnerable electrical signalling equipment?
As for the navigation equipment: never get stuck with data from one piece/kind of navigation equipment. Your autopilot should use directional beacons and GPS and inertial guidance data to crosscheck wherever it estimates a reading. There are hundreds of lives at stake if there is *any* reason to sound an alarm. This cannot and should not be left to the discretion of passengers. If there is a problem nip it in the bud, and make the aircraft resistant to that kind of noise! There is no other acceptable solution.
If you can really wreak all that havoc with a small electronic device, then why would a terrorist need to smuggle a bomb onto a plane? Anyone could crash the plane with a handful of batteries, some tape, and wire. Good-old spark-gap ultrawideband transmitter should affect just about everything! Wait until the right moment and *sparkety* *sparkety* *sparkety* *spark* *spark* *spark*!
Honestly, my bullshit detector is pegged here. It has all the likley factors: false inferences, ulterior motives, good reasons support an opposite inference. If there isn't enough controversy to support real science IT IS BULLSHIT!
The problem with such ToS: contracts are only valid if both sides get something of value. Paying for a service (even an entertainment service) and getting nothing because they offlined the servers the day you signed up would be a violation of basic contract law. Any court based on common law would entitle you to getting your money back despite what the ToS claims.
Therefore, ToS documents are only legal claims made by the seller. Some or all of those claims can be invalidated by a court because in a disagreement, the law trumps a legal claim the way "paper covers rock." On the other hand, the court can put more weight behind some or all of the ToS terms just by issuing a decision--regardless of whether it is for or against the particular plaintiff.
A: Sweden doesn't have the plurality of races, creeds, SES, regional interests, etc. that the USA does.
B: The USA has Single-Member-Districts to populate its representative bodies in almost every jurisdiction at almost every level of government. It mathematically over-represents the majority, and at times entrenches a minority against a majority. The effect is that a "simple majority" vote de jure is more like a two-thirds majority requirement de facto.
C: What people don't get is that the US system is DESIGNED to hand every close political contest over to the status-quo. Once in a while, or in places where the system is odd, there are upsets, but it is the exception and not the rule.
D: To win against an encumbent in the USA, you need to achieve an overwhelming level of support almost under the radar, to prevent the status-quo from calling in favors from political connections to tip the scales. They only need to get things back to a close race in order to achieve the upper hand.
E: If you are an American "underdog" (BTW: I have that in a T68i ringtone if anyone wants it), you should work harder outside (I don't mean against) the system, until you have sufficient momentum to outmaneuver your encumbent. Then you must maneuver your advantages against your opponents' political weaknesses.
F: Go read The Prince, and then get yourself into a quiet place with the dead-tree version of Discourses.
G: "You seek followers? Seek ZEROES!!!" -- F. Nietzsche [the emphasis is mine, and I have another one about translations if you like to nitpick]
Truly: votes are for losers. Real political power comes from the consensus--civil agreement-- that voting only pretends to express. Vote-getting is for losers. Winners know what will happen with or without the polls. Connect with and coalesce the the support of real people and the rest will come as a natural consequence.
Slashdot Mirror
Your question:
BLATANT astroturfing completely distorts the facts. You have set up a straw dog. Step 1: put words in your oponent's mouth as if you are speaking on his behalf"being a successful, aggressive company is unjust." Step 2: expose the fallacy in the bogus argument you posed: it is truly a non-sequitur argument and thus invalid.The problem is that you have put a spin on the argument. Let me correct this Anonymous Coward. You have discredited not only yourself but every other pro-Microsoft Slashdot Anonymous Coward short post.
If not every short pro-Microsoft post on Slashdot by Anonymous Coward is bogus, enough of them are bogus to completely justify ignoring them. The assumption that all pro-Microsoft Anonymous Cowards are malicious is relatively safe; the cost of the cases in which the assumption is wrong is negligible. You have yourself to blame, Anonymous Coward, friend of white-collar criminals, author of foul spin and misleading crap. You chose to lower the signal to noise ratio and your pollution must bear a warning label.
Long live critical thinking skills AT THE EXPENSE OF PROFIT.
How much would you pay me for a port of tip(1)?? tip(1) is BSD software that will allow you to connect stdin/stdout to a serial device (ie. /dev/tty.*) so that random software can access it.
I'm going to guess that you will need a Carbon driver wrapper so that classic style apps can use the BSD stdin/stdout or the /dev/tty.* devices. Do you know how MacAuthorize interfaces the modem?
Actually, I would keep Carbon. It just needs to be retooled to better conformance with the Cocoa Aqua interfaces. If they really wanted to make it slick, they could put support in the Carbon classes for the necessary runtime type detection to make them work like the loose-type Objective C objects.
What has to go is the end-user distinction between Carbon and Cocoa apps. Even more than the differences from Cocoa, Carbon should be considered a compatibility layer for OSX. They should flesh it out with minimal QT and GTK compatibility. Then (theoretically) you could run native GIMP and KOffice with a recompile. That would put the spurs to Adobe and get us some new compelling apps!
I have a TiBook. I'm typing on it now. The NeXTStep interface was cleaner than the MacOS Classic interface. The only thing that "dirties" the MacOSX interface is the "classic" look of apps that insist on drawing windows with their own application-specific goofy widgets that are designed to look good taking up all of a blurry 14" CRT screen.
Also, more time in the "lickable" Aqua world, and you will be instantly conscious of the mood altering effects of being surrounded by soft edges and clean surfaces with rich (but understated) textures when you switch back to the cold-hard Classic. It's easy to say "it's all just flash !*blink* *blink*", but you haven't really tasted both samples.
I've used MSWindows 3.0,3.1,95,XP; NextStep; BeOS FVWM, OpenLook, CDE, WindowMaker, AfterStep, Enlightenment, KDE, Sawfish, Black Box; etc.. I prefer the OS-X (still using Jaguar) interface. Keys include a cohesive window-management scheme, and *working* VFS. Also there's transparent terminals that use QuartzExtreme so that I can put a window with documentation under a Terminal.app window and type what I want based on the slightly blurred text underneath. Cocoa's message-passing for loose-types makes for a somewhat bloat-y experience, but it isn't something that scales with hardware. It runs nearly as well on a Grape G3 iMac as it does on my TiBook at twice the clock speed plus AltiVec and 32MB GPU.
That said, MacOSX is a logical continuation of NeXTStep. It is a leap from MacOS Classic. Let me say one thing: it is much less of a leap from Classic to OSX than it is from Classic to MSWindowsXP.
You can continue to run your old Classic apps in MacOS Classic if you like. I invite you to try EBay for an old NeXT cube/slab with some software on it. OSX has definitely met Classic users halfway. If you are so reactionary that you can't bear to part with your good-ol' key combo shortcuts and learn a new style, then you don't deserve to run new software that demands it. That's great if you're a "my own little world" style user who just needs Adobe apps and doesn't need UTF-8 international character support...
The bottom line is that you can hold out and save your money for a compelling personal reason to switch, but if you really want your old OS, the old interface guidelines, etc. it ain't gonna happen. Translating your comments in light of that makes your position sound more like "There are those of us who will never upgrade. Long Live Classic!" Whatever...
Can you use the vouchers to pay for a family pack of Panther? Does it have to be PC software, or even commercial software, or can you give the money to a GNU project or the FSF?
Children should be kept track of by a teacher with no more students in the classroom than a single teacher can engage at once. Using technology to monitor students is penitentiary infrastructure.
Schools are a place where tchnology should not be viewed as a way to shrink the bottom line while maintaining the same results on paper. Technology has its place in schools, and I'm not against it, but there are human factors that we are simply not up to filling with technology. Good teachers with a personality cannot be replaced as a classroom institution. RFID tags... PLEASE!!!??
Your question is actually more critical of Windows security than the results of the survey: you doubt that the Windows developers surveyed can (or will) actually assess and report software security..
The end result is that either Windows developers know their software is insecure on an insecure platform, or that they are not qualified to make that distinction, and by default their software is untrusted and insecure.
First off, Gator is using lawyers to troll. We need a new term for trolling people into court: using legal threats as an attention getting device. We also need a way to punish people who engage in this kind of abuse of the law.
This is taken directly from Gator's eWallet thingie's (no) Privacy (whatsoever) Statement.
Spyware is software that runs within a person's personal domain, inside those boundaries which the wise people of the USA commonly concieve are protected by the constitution from governmental intrusion. Once active within a person's private domain, this software releases information obtained without giving said person any opportunity to evaluate and veto any particular information released to a second party whose interests may at any time conflict with those of the first party. Since the software acts as an agent on behalf of another party to report information about the first party, it makes sense to say it is a spy. Since it is at the same time a spy and software, the contraction "spyware" can be easily defined as a legal term, and Gator would not escape that legal definition without significantly changing the focus of their business.
Somehow, these people think that if they omit names and social security numbers that they are not violating anyone's privacy. Even if the data is anonymous, if any particular click-through can be linked back to a discrete history of click-throughs, they have created a "glove" identity that will over time be easily matched to any other such collection of data despite the omission of a distinct identifier. It will become a "hand print" which is inseparable from the person who made it. This is sloppy reasoning.
Advertisement is publishing. Gathering data on the targets of that advertisement is marketing. It is not advertisement. Just because one does both does not mean that advertising describes everything that one does. For example, if I enjoy knitting, and I enjoy killing people with knitting needles, is it fair for me to demand people call me a "knitter" and refrain from calling me a murderer?
What will Gator do when a judge calls their software spyware?
Does that extra L3 cache cost more or less than a second Opteron chip? Does it cost more or less than an UltrasparcIII 1U server?
Sorry.
Then again, I'm not running windows, and neither do I have Visual C++, nor do I have the libraries to link against.
Maybe that deterred me from downloading. Should I audit the source, or has anyone else actually read the stuff?
How difficult would a port be?
I guess I was looking for a tarball and got hung up on the "THIS IS VISUAL C++" label on the downloads. Silly me. Thanks for checking though!
This software will probably scrape your hard drive for email addresses and then spam them with your return address, install a DDoS slave and invoke the return of Zuul, Queen of Gozer.
Seriously, you have to download and install the program, then *two* drivers, and tell me (wise ones) you're not nervous about this?
This topic is SO OLD...
from Nietzsche's Human, all too Human, s.298, R.J. Hollingdale transl. www.pitt.edu:80/~wbcurry/nietzsche/nietzsche.htmlForbes doesn't have much of a news desk given the lack of fact-checking going on. If you use GPL'ed software and you don't want to release source for your binary distributions, you can just find all the copyright holders for all the code you're using and pay them whatever they want for a non-GPL license. The thing that really grinds Forbes' readers' teeth is that the programmers still own the copyrights and not the (hand waving) mystery men behind the corporate veil.
Why is this so bad for Cisco (Linksys) and Broadcom? When you outsource development you have to pay more to own the IP produced by the contractors. The only difference here is that Cisco and Broadcom didn't pay for the development, and the copyright holders now have claims against the license violations. It wasn't in the budget...
The spoiler:
Why should we be glad that Pivx decided that we don't need a single convenient place to catalog the remaining unfixed old IE vulnerabilities? Why should we give them a hand when they are helping Microsoft slack off again and shirk their responsibility to the people who are duped into using the software and later become a victim of an international identity theft?
PS: A job posting doesn't mean they're hiring. An offer letter means they're hiring.
It seems to me that your SMP (Symmetric) kernel could just as easily (with a kernel module or something) become AMP (Asymmetric): creating one class of thread on a particular class of processor. What I mean is the loader would create an executable main memory thread/object tagged for a DSP or a x86 or an AMD64 or PPC processor, and the kernel would be able to execute these tagged objects on specific processors on expansion cards or a remote host or a FC WWPN target or such craziness..
The biggest benefit/drawback that I see is all the Slashdot trolling mirroring/mocking/echoing the "Imagine a Beowulf cluster of these" with "Imagine a Dragonfly cluster of these..." The change will be felt mostly when the pissing contest and flamewar between the trolls' biters resurrect the old Linux/BSD holy war.
I predict this will happen when people figure out how to get the Dragonfly threading/messaging code into NetBSD.
You can find 4.2BSD at Unix History or more precisely Unix History 1983 Pane.
In the old days, people would just quietly update the root zone and cut Verisign's nameservers out entirely. Then the remaining root servers would all filter out wildcard replies. The zone delegations would switch, and as the TTLs expire around the net Verisign would disappear from the DNS business. All this ICANN crap gives Verisign the power to pull crap like this and make legal threats if the rest of the Internet turns their back on them.
What would hapen then? It would be up to the ISPs which usually supply DNS servers in setup configuration guides and via DHCP to decide which servers have the authoritative root zone.
Oh, and BTW: what do you think Verisign has planned down the road? Signed zones? Boosted certificate business?
DNS isn't broken enough to create demand for that kind of technology. DNSSEC has been around for a while and really has almost died. Verisign can almost set themselves up as a taxing authority. Will we let them? Probably. What do you think Legislators would do in this situation? Write the monopoly a charter!! Then, they can carve up the authority between a few big whigs to get out from under the monopoly spectre. Create a dazzling telcom-like illusion of competition. It'll be monopoly pricing without the monopoly!
Quit whining and run your own DNS server. When you are asked, you should willingly pony up the network bandwidth and server load to run a root server.
You'd better get cracking too: there's a lot of RFCs to bone up on before you can achieve the status of the enlightened few who are above the controversy by sheer virtue of pure wisdom.
If all the selfless people made it their livelihood to outproduce the demands of the greedy, would the demand diminish? Greed is foolishness, and a fool is self-defeating. Leave the greedy alone, but show them how to BE happy so that they can see parity from striving for happiness.
You can't sustain a technical solution for a political problem, so leave their forum and create a new one without political problems. Why not just go back to IP addresses? Why not a new distributed database? Signed DNSSEC zones with PGP style peer-reviewed keyrings for certificates? What's the BIG PROBLEM here? The solution is apparent in understanding the problem.
Actually, you might notice a difference: Java might peg all of your CPUs seemingly for no good reason.
Depending on what patch level your Solaris is at, your JVM might be using one OS thread-handling model or another. One apparently makes Java go nuts on the spinlocks, which is less noticable on slower machines. True story of a Solaris support case at work...
If you want to sell more hardware, why would you make a framework that scales well down to smaller, slower hardware? The idea is that the more hardware you throw at it, the better it will run. That is offensive to people whose computing effort isn't directly pulling in revenue. A little bit of cleverness can go a long way, but people who only care about fat paychecks don't understand that kind of long-term thinking. Java is definitely for business: soaking up budgets!!!
Don't be a GUMP. DO NOT WORK FOR FREE. It's a JOB not a HOBBY.
If you kiss enough ass, they'll give you a low-level management position which means signing responsibility with no authority or budget. All you get is the promise of middle management if you can continue to kiss your way up the hierarchy. Now you are responsible for the work that other people do, and there is so much that THEY can't do it all so YOU can't do it by yourself either. If you try to climb the corporate ladder, you will always have someone else's ass in your face: you will always be someone else's bitch. You will be OWNED like the tool that you are.
You will have no control over who you manage, but you will be ENTIRELY reliant on your direct reports. Their failure will be your failure, and you will have no way to influence them except to be an asshole because you will not have discretion over enough company resources to get results the nice way. You must achieve control, or you're going to recieve the sum of your staff's bad reviews. Being the new guy you will prolly get the scrub staff that nobody else wants. You'll have to kiss their asses too sometimes.
As for this:
Are you autistic? Do you understand the words that you are saying? Are you reciting the employee manual verbatim? Do you realize that if anyone hears you say this crap outside the scope of an HR job you will be branded a fool and laughed at behind your back? People will like you at work if they HAVE TO because they get ADDICTED to the services you provide. You are the pusher and your boss is the junkie. Repeat that. Deliver. Repeat...Being CONSCIENTIOUSLY late to work is TIME MANAGEMENT. Actually: you're on time if you accomplish what you promised to the people who are asking for your effort. As an employee, you must DRAW THE LINE to balance the priorities between your personal life and your job. If you fail to do this you are a WAGE SLAVE. You must not allow your job to expect too much for you to keep your personal life on track. YOU must manage the expectations. YOU must set the goals that YOU can deliver.
Familiarize yourself with the FLSA (if you live in the US), and avail yourself of your rights. Know that the overtime exemption for computer workers does not apply to jobs where you have no DISCRETIONARY POWERS. Usually DISCRETIONARY POWERS are interpereted that they necessarily include the discretion to come and go as you deem necessary in order to fulfil your professional responsibilities. If you do not have DISCRETIONARY POWERS to decide how to fulfil those responsibilities, then you are NOT EXEMPT FROM OVERTIME.
Get a Lawyer. Work your 50 hours. Record them carefully in a little book, and get someone on the level to initial the enties. Send your payroll department a notice of the unpayed wages. If you can't get results without involving the lawyer charge them a late fee to cover legal costs incurred in collecting what you were legally owed anyway.
How about banning cellphones laptops and games just in case you have a marketing partnership for in-flight communications/entertainment/advertising services? Nothing like a captive audience to drum up advertising bucks for those poor ailing airline companies!
If planes went haywire during sunspots and solar flares the FAA would require them to be properly shielded or use fiber optics or something. Why not demand that they use fiber optics for flight-systems instead of antiquated and vulnerable electrical signalling equipment?
As for the navigation equipment: never get stuck with data from one piece/kind of navigation equipment. Your autopilot should use directional beacons and GPS and inertial guidance data to crosscheck wherever it estimates a reading. There are hundreds of lives at stake if there is *any* reason to sound an alarm. This cannot and should not be left to the discretion of passengers. If there is a problem nip it in the bud, and make the aircraft resistant to that kind of noise! There is no other acceptable solution.
If you can really wreak all that havoc with a small electronic device, then why would a terrorist need to smuggle a bomb onto a plane? Anyone could crash the plane with a handful of batteries, some tape, and wire. Good-old spark-gap ultrawideband transmitter should affect just about everything! Wait until the right moment and *sparkety* *sparkety* *sparkety* *spark* *spark* *spark*!
Honestly, my bullshit detector is pegged here. It has all the likley factors: false inferences, ulterior motives, good reasons support an opposite inference. If there isn't enough controversy to support real science IT IS BULLSHIT!
The problem with such ToS: contracts are only valid if both sides get something of value. Paying for a service (even an entertainment service) and getting nothing because they offlined the servers the day you signed up would be a violation of basic contract law. Any court based on common law would entitle you to getting your money back despite what the ToS claims.
Therefore, ToS documents are only legal claims made by the seller. Some or all of those claims can be invalidated by a court because in a disagreement, the law trumps a legal claim the way "paper covers rock." On the other hand, the court can put more weight behind some or all of the ToS terms just by issuing a decision--regardless of whether it is for or against the particular plaintiff.
A: Sweden doesn't have the plurality of races, creeds, SES, regional interests, etc. that the USA does.
B: The USA has Single-Member-Districts to populate its representative bodies in almost every jurisdiction at almost every level of government. It mathematically over-represents the majority, and at times entrenches a minority against a majority. The effect is that a "simple majority" vote de jure is more like a two-thirds majority requirement de facto.
C: What people don't get is that the US system is DESIGNED to hand every close political contest over to the status-quo. Once in a while, or in places where the system is odd, there are upsets, but it is the exception and not the rule.
D: To win against an encumbent in the USA, you need to achieve an overwhelming level of support almost under the radar, to prevent the status-quo from calling in favors from political connections to tip the scales. They only need to get things back to a close race in order to achieve the upper hand.
E: If you are an American "underdog" (BTW: I have that in a T68i ringtone if anyone wants it), you should work harder outside (I don't mean against) the system, until you have sufficient momentum to outmaneuver your encumbent. Then you must maneuver your advantages against your opponents' political weaknesses.
F: Go read The Prince , and then get yourself into a quiet place with the dead-tree version of Discourses .
G: "You seek followers? Seek ZEROES!!!"
-- F. Nietzsche [the emphasis is mine, and I have another one about translations if you like to nitpick]
Truly: votes are for losers. Real political power comes from the consensus--civil agreement-- that voting only pretends to express. Vote-getting is for losers. Winners know what will happen with or without the polls. Connect with and coalesce the the support of real people and the rest will come as a natural consequence.
H: Beware the ides....