Posts by bombastic bob 10944 publicly visible posts • joined 1 May 2015
"A standard HTTPS server certificate attests that the holder of a given private key is also the owner of a particular domain - nothing more. In particular it asserts nothing about the identity of the owner."
not quite accurate. the server certificate is supposed to match the IP address and/or domain of the server, and be signed by an authority [self-signing works if you allow it to when prompted by the browser] to authenticate the cert itself. As I recall, the CN needs to be the domain name for a server cert. There's a lot of discussion about this online, so it's easy to find. You can use openssl to be your own CA and issue your own server certs. Or you can use cacert.org. But their root cert isn't on Microsoft's OSs by default (or I haven't seen it, at least), so you'll have to load the root cert, and then all of their issued certs will be trusted. That's basically how it works.
so the cert doesn't determine the SSL encryption. It simply validates that the web site in question is who they say they are, and not some man in the middle trying to read your encrypted traffic.
"Is there any evidence these have not had their public keys shared with the spooks. No need to break any SSL protocol or cypher if you have the key to decrypt it all."
um, I don't think you understand the following very well:
a) public/private key encryption
b) SSL protocol handshaking
c) certificate signing and how it authenticates a web site
the public keys in the certs have little to do with SSL protocol, but (as I understand) they're used for validating the signatures, sort of like the way a hashing algorithm can validate a logon and password without revealing the password.
So there's no decryption with a public key. only ENcryption. then you could match the encryption to a known result (I'm assuming) to validate it.
The SSL protocol uses different methods, among them Diffie-Hellman. Time to google if you haven't heard of it.
Or I can simply point you to it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffie%E2%80%93Hellman_key_exchange
so even if you had a cert's private key, you wouldn't be able to use it to decrypt SSL traffic.
"Therefore, although they COULD in theory sign a fake cert of their own and have it accepted by some browsers as being valid credentials for your site and then man-in-the-middle your server so that they accept connections with THEIR generated private key instead of yours, almost any modern browser will throw a fit when they try this."
etc,
very true. I've been deep into researching cert-land over the last ~2 weeks (and some prior). A summary of what I've found: you can be your own CA, but you have to load the root (and other) certs onto the target machines somehow (let's say an application installer program, like the one I recently open sourced). Like with a self-signed cert, however, you throw warnings in web browsers.
Internet Explorer uses Windows' system cert store, and you can have an application installer (let's say) install new root certs to prevent warnings. Incidentally, this can happen without your knowledge from any application running with 'Admin' privs, calling the right functions.
Firefox and other browsers often have their OWN cert stores separate from the OS, so you'll have to get past THEIR security and warnings to load new root certs.
Intarweb filtering appliances often use the 'MITM' technique as part of their operations (did you mention those? I might've missed it), so IT people must load the appliance's root certs on everyone's workstation by policy or manually [whichever].
As for code-signing, kernel drivers require a "microsoft signature" to load from bootup, but they can dynamically load after boot using regular signed certs (so load your root and signing certs and your drivers will work post-boot, but not during boot). Enabling 'self cert' lets you test things, but apparently shuts off DRM-related things. Not like I need them...
Microsot has also added an even BIGGER "tollbooth" with regards to signing requirements in windows 10, allegedly for quality assurance, but most likely to put even BIGGER roadblocks and tolls in place for independent devs and open sourcers, and maybe lock us into all using windows 10 and playing by THEIR rules forever. That's my opinion, ok.
As for web site certs, self-signs work, but throw a warning (typically) as you pointed out. If you accept the cert by ignoring the warning, https will work just fine like it was meant to be.
openssl can create certs easily, and there are several good online resources on how to do this (including my own web page on being your own cert authority). So yeah, the info is a search engine away. code-signing resources go through Microsoft's "circle jerk" documentation hell, so it's harder to find THAT information without time and frustration.
And related, MS's own examples for code signing self-certs actually create certs that use sha1. But sha256 works fine for code signing certs as far as I can tell (creating my own, of course). But I did see some odd behavior in the kernel debug output in Win 7 checked build when using sha256, some assert about the hash length being larger than some value...
hopefully not 'too long' forcing 'did not read'
<quote>
I'm sure it's been mentioned, but I'm not prepared to read all 156 comments to check.
</quote>
I'm reading them, and have seen GWX and the Steve Gibson one mentioned at least 4 times (each), probably more for GWX control pane. it's starting to look like SPAMMING
<quote>
and yeah, soon you'll have a Steve Balmer replicant claiming, internally, that you know, it's a bit naff, but HEY, WE GOT FREE, NATIONAL COVERAGE!!!!!
</quote>
it's an easter egg in the GWX panel. Just shake your PC vigorously, next time it comes up. That activates the easter egg. (maybe some might activate if you put it in a microwave oven on high for 3 minutes, or use the CD/DVD tray for a coffee cup holder)
(ok I've been reading BOFH too much)
<quote>
"This. Its pretty obvious Microsoft don't see it that way, they see the your desktop as their advertising space and its steadily getting worse."
Just because that's the way they see it doesn't make it excusable.
</quote>
yeah, I don't want my DESKTOP SCREEN looking like the TV from 'Idiocracy' with ads all around the outside, and about 1/3 of the screen devoted to actual content...
oh, wait, like a TYPICAL WEB SITE in the 21st century, except it's the "new desktop model"
/me self-slap for giving Micro-shaft yet ANOTHER way of SCREWING UP THE OS
<quote>
10 PRINT "Upgrade this PC to Windows 10"
20 PRINT "This PC is not compatible with Windows 10"
30 GOTO 10
</quote>
you need an extra "GOTO 10" line (yes that was a vague Futurama reference, like when Calculon asked Bender sarcastically if he had an extra "GOTO 10" line)
because, as we all know, it would be even STUPIDER if it DID have an extra 'GOTO 10' line.
well, the 'department of education' isn't helping much. Perhaps if schools taught "the 3 R's" as well as computers, and abandoned all of the revisionist history and "social indoctrination", as well as STOPPING IT with the Ritalin (which gets districts MORE MONEY as they dumb down the smart kids with drugs and force them into 'special education' instead of 'fast track'). Let's face it, too many agendas are victimizing the kids instead of educating them. And abolish the teacher's union while we're at it. Hire people who've been in the private sector instead of "professional educators". you know, having the people that understand what the REAL world actually NEEDS might dispense with the CRAP curricula.
Then kids will learn what they REALLY need.
I also wouldn't mind teaching actual ARITHMETIC without calculators for the 1st 4 years... it's how _I_ learned and I can do basic math in my head without requiring a computing device. no more blank looks when the teacher asks "what's 6 times 7". [why it's the answer to the ultimate question, that's what!]
back in the 90's I saw something like this at a CompUSA store. You put your fingers into a couple of sensors (one for each hand), and "think left" to move left, "think right" to move right. It was actually kind of fun to play the demonstration 'downhill ski' game, until it got boring. I had no trouble at all controlling it back then, so maybe I should get one of those headsets and do some experimenting... ?
(I also didn't see a lot of people trying it - either boring or 'normals' can't make it work?)
" I suspect it doesn't amount to much, other than a tick box in the HR department."
all it can be is "proof of potential", and I think most who know better look at these 'certifications' with the obligatory skepticism. The certifications are highly overrated, like the "Ron Bailey School of Broadcasting" doesn't make you an electrical engineer (but you CAN pass the FCC test!).
experience is proof of ability. certification and education are proof of POTENTIAL only. But like you pointed out, the HR 'screeners' will see the alphabet soup and that it matches their "list", and so robotically filter the resumes accordingly. THAT is its only possible value...
('what color is your parachute' would recommend bypassing HR anyway, so no need to follow the rules of mortals, if you can contact a hiring manager directly, because THEY are the ones who really recognize true skill and if you have it, they'll pick YOU over THEM)
I use thunderbird, and don't want to see it go.
But I don't want it to turn into a "hamburger menu" version, either. If the wrong group maintains it, we could end up with another "the METRO" looking interface, like what seems to be happening to Firefox lately...
and don't call it "modern", that's actually a pejorative term, implying NOT wanting "that change" means you're a neanderthal or something... [like the way the "the METRO"-tards for windows "ape" and win-10-nic go off and do all the time]
maybe we could just host it on git. why does it need to "change" or "develop" anyway? works fine for me, and I'm using a 2 year old version even... (with gnome 2, on FreeBSD, and I'm happy with it). Just fix the bugs, and make it nice and solid.
I hate it when "already rich" people want allegedly-rich people (i.e. those trying to BECOME rich) to pay confiscatorily high tax rates like that. It ensures THEY have their private "I am already rich" club, keeping the rest of us from entering.
flat tax rates are the ONLY *FAIR* tax rates. otherwise, it's just a sneaky way to continue separating 'haves' from 'have nots'. because the dirty secret is that "the rich" do not pay THAT kind of tax rate, EVER. Yes, maybe on 'wage income', but that's a FRACTION of what they REALLY earn, and THAT money is often taxed at a LOWER rate (say 'capital gains' and 'tax shelters'). And THEY know it, and TOO MANY of us do NOT know it, and they use this "tax the rich" nonsense to FOOL everybody in to thinking they CARE or something, but it's a BIG! FAT! LIE!!! They just want themSELVES to keep their "wealthy" status and keep OTHERS from joining "the club".
"Am I the only one to bother optimising images for web use? I come across pages with the images approx. 4000x3000 that let the browser do the work of scaling it down to 400x300."
how about Image Magick's 'convert' on the server side?
convert bloat-image.jpg -thumbnail x300 reasonable-image.jpg
should work. could even be done in a PHP or perl CGI. A more efficient algorithm would be to create the thumbnail first (using a similar command), then clicking the photo would open up the full-size image.
but that takes EFFORT. And these bandwidth-stealing "coders" are LAZY.
<quote>
"badly designed pages jump around as unsized elements load"
- The reg has been doing that on me recently, caused me to post anon once or twice as the page jumped about as I tried to focus the comment box and I didn't notice. Never used to do that...
</quote>
I offer my own suggestion: use <table> creatively, and everything lines up. Amazing! and it's low-bandwidth...
"I recently completed a standalone HTML 5 app for in-house use, and was a bit horrified to note that it came in at over 3000 lines of Javascript code (with no libraries). Then I noticed that a colleague had included, in a related project, a single third party library comprising more than 17,000 lines"
now you know how to separate the "real programmers" from the "script kiddies" and the "wannabes".
it's also why I don't like "someone's 3rd party library" - they rarely do what I want, the way I want it, or else need too many hacks and take FOREVER to master. By the time I've mastered "someone's 3rd party library" well enough to complete the code, I could've written the entire thing myself, made it do what I want, and done it RIGHT. And then played a bunch of video games, and then gone on vacation, and after coming back from vacation, a comparable dev effort using that 3rd party library would STILL be going on and on and on into a quagmire. Seen it before, in many contexts. And it's not "NIH", it's the practicality of getting things DONE.
"There's also the turnaround time for DNS lookup, establishing a connection, and multiple request/responses for the dozens of trackers, beacons, analytics, CDNs, and goodness knows what else that comes with every page view"
but if they hosted all of their own content, they wouldn't be able to 'distribute the pain' of all of that bandwidth, would they?
(humorous mis-spellings in topic intentional, you're welcome)
Point is, I really hate having to re-re-re-re-re-re-download "the freshest copy" of some monolithic ginormous javascript library that sits "out there" on a content delivery server, one that a zillion lazy web developers [ab]use to create their "content" every! freaking! time!, *JUST* to view search results. It wastes my time having to wade through all of that.
And if you try to MANAGE THE CHAOS by using 'noscript', you're sometimes getting hit up with the "you cannot view the content, you're using an ad blocker" page. Thanks, Forbes dot com.
well, complaining without a solution is just complaining. SO...
The Solution: stick to REGULAR HTML (with only MINIMAL scripting, and ONLY when ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY) to provide the content. I do. It works.
[It's amazing what '<table>' can do for you, if you hand-code the HTML for it]
-or- (more appealing to the inexperienced coders, perhaps)
The Alternate Solution: get W3C to add to the HTML spec the most popular 'web features' that those monolithic ginormous scripting libraries do, WITHOUT scripting things to do it. Then fix the web pages to use them.
[Lazy web devs, relying on 'JQuery' and other similar libraries, are responsible for this java-scripting nightmare from hell. I'm sure of it! "https://code.jquery.com/jquery-latest.js" is 276k!]
<quote>
1) Trains would never work as you'd die from asphyxia
2) Cars would never replace the horse and cart
3) Man would never fly
</quote>
4) iron ships can't float
5) heavy objects fall faster than light ones
6) the earth is the center of the universe
and so on, yeah.
I still like the idea that spinning "stuff" might emit gravitons, or SOME kind of particle, and especially good if it can be used for propulsion. Lots of early work involving that concept... and even more recent contributions...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ehrenfest_paradox
after all, relativistic effects gotta do SOMETHING... Bremsstrahlung at the very least
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bremsstrahlung
actually, m!=0 for a photon. its effective mass is a function of frequency/energy of the particle.
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/ParticleAndNuclear/photon_mass.html
zero "rest mass" would be more accurate.
the photon mass is involved in how gravity affects it, and was part of the proof of Einstein's theory of relativity back in the day, when stars were observed to have "moved" due to their relative position near the sun during an eclipse. Predicting that was part of Einstein's theory, and so when it was finally observed, it proved his relativity theory was correct. FYI.
(and if photons were truly 'massless', gravity would not affect them)
hmmm... my reply seems to have been lost. I'll check back and delete it. UI problems or ?
cold fusion probably happens at rates that are immeasurable, just like the radioactive decay of "stable" isotopes. It's "there" but you can't measure it because it's below the noise threshold.
So it's not entirely 'twaddle' for cold fusion, just highly impractical. The probability of hydrogen fusion is related to temperature and pressure, and PROBABLY resonant energies. Current research may or may not be focusing on the resonant energy angle, but maybe they like their 'secret sauce' and so nobody's really talking about it. In any case, I don't know if cold fusion with palladium and monotomic hydrogen (or heavy water for that matter) actually WORKS in ANY capacity, and indications are that it does NOT, but I wouldn't rule out immeasurable reactions taking place. But yeah, its impractical.
The EmDrive may ALSO be impractical for similar reasons. If it's MOMENTUM of light-speed particles that cause the thrust [regardless of how/why and Unruh radiation, or not] the energy required for propulsion goes up by a factor of 4 when you double the energy. Thrust = delta-momentum which is delta-velocity times mass. the mass flow rate of rocket exhaust multiplied by its delta-velocity (which is proportional to the square of the energy) equals the thrust. So, double the mass, double the thrust. QUADRUPLE the energy, double the thrust. Rocket engines are a compromise of needed mass and available energy. And the EmDrive could not POSSIBLY be efficient, based on accelerating things to light speed. The Xe ion drive would be a better choice in deep space.
Well, _I_ think that _I_ can explain it. And it's not that hard.
Momentum IS being conserved, because it is SPEWING PARTICLES. Either that, or it's creating a gravity effect.
If you were to shine a light in a particular direction in outer space, you'd create thrust due to the photons going at 'C' and of course their effective mass in an 'mv' momentum equation. This is well known.
The obvious answer HERE is that there are particles being emitted. Microwave energy is a form of 'gamma'. now, that cone shaped thing just might be acting like a WAVE GUIDE of sorts, and JUST MIGHT be impedence coupling the gammas to "the air".
Alternatively...
There's some thought about a spinning disk causing relativistic effects due to a couple of physics properties. First, the NET velocity of a spinning disk is zero (this is why there's 'rotational velocity' and 'rotational momentum' to explain THOSE things). HOWEVER... the individual points on the disk exhibit instantaneous velocities that *MIGHT* result in RELATIVISTIC effects - you know, like mass increasing, time dilating, that sort of thing. BUT - the NET effect is ZERO because it's a solid piece of 'stuff'.
Some experiments have been reported (though I can't find the web sites any more) that SUGGEST that a fast spinning disk may cause 'graviton emission' or 'gravity wave emission' (your choice, wave/particle, tomayto/tomahto) due to this somewhat self-contradicting "relativistic effect" of a spinning disk. A disk spinning horizontally might cause 'gravity shielding' or some other effect on items suspended above it, which REPORTEDLY WEIGH LESS by a measurable, though small, amount (according to the reports I read maybe a decade or so ago). This is, of course, 'Coast to Coast AM' material so take it for what it's worth. But so is *THIS* device.
And so I'm suggesting that *IF* in fact the magnetron is energizing air, and 'spinning' it in the resonant cavity, that the 'spin' _MIGHT_ be causing gravitons to be emitted. Or it could be bremstralung, which would ALSO create a possible gamma source for 'shining a light' momentum effect.
To prove this, fill the resonant cavity with high pressure Xenon gas. THAT might actually create a REAL graviton field. Or not. Provocative, no?
"Re-read GPL, it is intended to protect end-users like you or me unlike Microsoft license which gives them right to disable your copy of software whenever they feel it."
not entirely... the GPL also dictates how the software must be distributed, and restricts "incompatible" licensing with derived works. In the case of GPLv3 they go MANY steps further in preventing ANY 'closed source' component, require patent licensing, etc.. Fortunately Linux itself is still GPLv2.
Personally, I'd like to write a utility to "open source" a BLOB or library by converting it into assembly language and/or JUST DATA, to work around this limitation (i.e. it's now compilable 'source'), and THEN let end-users decide whether or not they want to run something like that. Most likely they won't care.
Keep in mind that as long as the GPL code can be modified, re-compiled, re-linked, etc. and then still work, it shouldn't be an issue with the GPL, for that was its intent. If it happens to link in a binary compiled object or library, or separate source code for a non-GPL-compatible licensed library, and that object/library has NOTHING to do with the GPL-covered code (say "ZFS"), then the GPL shouldn't apply to "that library". My guess is THIS is how Canonical sees it, despite the cries from the "force everything to be compatible with the GPL because it was shipped WITH Linux" crowd.
there are MANY reasons why a module needs to have a 'closed source' component. One of them might be FCC rules, for things like wifi drivers, where the requirements for certifying your driver would be to take steps to prevent modifying your software if the software controls things like power tables and frequencies [the things that FCC regs, well, REGULATE].
So Broadcom WiFi will *ALWAYS* have a 'BLOB' because the FCC regs demand it. It also has a "wrapper" so you can re-compile the kernel. I'm not entirely sure how the source for the binary kernel module for ZFS actually works, but I expect that the source *IS* available. The license contention has to do with the Sun/Oracle requirements, and GPLv2 can't have "additional requirements" if it's GPL-covered. So it's being shipped as a NOT GPL component that's (as I understand it to be) dynamically loaded, "bundled" with the OS and not "a separate component" as far as Stallman and others are concerned. THEY *feel* (not think) it's a "violation", but you can bundle non-open-source software with Linux if you want. PURISTS won't, but sometimes it's needed, and the INTENT of the GPL is to allow modification of GPL-covered code and "the system still works".
So if you can re-compile the kernel and the ZFS module for the new kernel, there should be NO issue with the GPL. If re-compiling the kernel PREVENTS you from using the ZFS module, there MAY be an issue, but if the module is "not part of the GPL code repository" then I'd say NO, it's NOT a problem, and I hope the courts agree with me. Otherwise, the "fascist enforcement" of 'open source forever' from the use of a trivial GPL component may COME BACK TO BITE ITSELF IN THE ASS. In other words, the unintended repercussion might be something the FSF and Stallman don't want to deal with even MORE than having ZFS survive as part of Ubuntu.
"By 'stupid bits', you mean Unity?"
I know *I* would. Unity is like "phone on a desktop", _EXACTLY_ what M$ is doing WRONG these days.
"the mobile age" is HIGHLY overrated. *NOBODY* does "desktop things" on a phone, "Continuum" is a freaking JOKE, and "tablet interface" *ONLY* works on a fondleslab, which has a dwindling popularity if you read the market correctly (basically they're just oversized PHONES and are used in similar ways).
So SERIOUS computing is STILL done with keyboard+mouse on a DESKTOP computer, which needs a DESKTOP interface, like Mint has. Of course, Ubu can run MATE as well. That's what I do with Ubu - MATE desktop.
Once again, Win-10-nic and "Ape" are cooperatively *KILLING* new PC sales, by PREVENTING "the new machine" from looking/performing PERCEPTIVELY BETTER than 'what you already have'. This goes DOUBLE if your existing computer has Win 7 or XP on it. or even VISTA...
"Many businesses upgraded from Windows XP a couple of years ago and Windows 10 is not expected to drive larger volumes of purchases of standard desktops and notebooks until 2016"
you mean NEVER, not 'until 2016'. Only by KILLING OFF Windows 7 (this October) does Microsoft even STAND A CHANCE of *FORCING* new computer makers to ONLY offer a "the METRO" FLUGLY (flat/ugly) interface computer as the *ONLY* option.
Well, not ONLY, if manufacturers are to GROW A CLUE and start volume-shipping "alternatives" - like Mint Linux, maybe?
So as long as this year's computer is not PERCEPTIBLY BETTER than last year's computer, the only SIGNIFICANT sales that will take place are due to a) do not have a computer, or b) the old computer is broken . No more "new/shiny" as a motivation, because there _IS_ no "new/shiny". there's only "mediocre/dull".
well, I'd MUCH rather do COBOL than ".Not" coding, that's for sure.
having to do BOTH - maybe they should hire a starving contractor in a 3rd world country... someone willing to actually SUFFER that much.
or they could hire ME, I'd hold my nose and get it done in a very short time, but for a unbelievably high price - my soul (and sanity) is worth a LOT these days...
[we've all had that "clean up this @#$% code" contract, haven't we?]
my worst case example of this was from my predecessor at a major computer hardware company, in the M.I.S. department. There was a COBOL to FORTRAN 'hook' needed by the ASK/MANMAN system (written in FORTRAN) to get sales tax from the VERTEX (written in COBOL) system, that had quarterly tape updates and everything [it was the 90's on a minicomputer]. The hook's source was lost. When I made some requested changes to the COBOL, an old bug re-surfaced. Seems that the FORTRAN side of the hook was having values passed by REFERENCE, and the DOOFUS programmer MODIFIED THEM before passing to the COBOL code (add 1 or something). What he SHOULD have done is made copies. His 'fix' was probably to subtract 1 again, or whatever. My fix was make copies into different variables, modify THOSE, pass THOSE to the COBOL program. And that programmer's name is permanently burnt into my 'never work with THAT guy unless I'm 1 day from absolute financial ruin' list.
there used to be a nationwide 55 mph speed limit, passed by Con-Grab in the 70's, as an "emergency measure" at the request of President Nixon as I recall.
nobody obeyed it. enforcing it was nearly impossible. CB radios became popular ways of evading the cops. And that's what happens when STUPID laws are passed. People widely disregard them.
yeah, classic libertarian argument implied.
Aside from the fact that it's a STUPID law, that it will give FOREIGN encryption providers and software and device makers AN EDGE over U.S. businesses, and what makes THEM think "the bad guys" won't ALWAYS be able to "get theirs" while potential victims [regular citizens] won't even have SSL encryption available to do BANKING TRANSACTIONS??? Widespread crime ensues. Buh-bye internet commerce. Buh-bye internet banking.
So many things would be affected.
I told Feinstein in an e-mail that she should hand over EVERY KEY TO HER HOUSE to law enforcement, and THAT ANALOGY was IDENTICAL to THIS LEGISLATION in its intent.
I fired off a Nasty-Gram to my senator, Feinstein. I avoided profanity. It wasn't easy.
https://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/e-mail-me
that's where ANYONE can send a Nasty-Gram. It helps if you live in Cali-fornicate-you, but ANYONE can say whatever they want.
It also helps if you give REAL contact information.
I'm sure there's a SIMILAR contact form for the other senator, the 'Establishment' RINO.
stoopid gummint.
"Where I work, we really kicked in with pair programming and saw the benefits mentioned in the article. We then took it further and now do mobbing."
sorry, I see that as the *WORST* outcome of an 'Agile' philosophy, infinite scrums and no work being done, and "the junior guy" has as much influence as the most senior and experienced and competent person in 'the mob', because, "fairness". And predictable lousy outcome.
Also can't help but think of an old silent film with the 'Keystone Cops'.
"Companies are being created and managed by people who grew up getting participation trophies and always told how good they were regardless of actual performance."
no argument from me. I'm sure many of these companies are 'Unicorns' and, ahem, "one or two" articles in THIS fine online publication have been rather *scathing* regarding their true value...
worse, though, is (it seems) a lot of the engineers are _ALSO_ "like that". And it's "their turn" now to do things "their way" [explaining Win-10-nic, for example].
so paired programming could ALSO be a pair of IDIOTS circling the drain...
"Long ago, I was a programmer. Fortunately, I never collaborated -- it would have driven me mad. Your mileage may vary."
yeah, good point.
paired programming works ok if "I drive" and the other guy [whom I'm assisting in getting the project back on track, for example] has intimate familiarity with the details. Then I can focus my 'big picture' mentality on getting the solution, and make use of "the detail guy's" experience. [it's worked well a few times, actually]
but for day-to-day development, I wouldn't bother. just use it when it makes sense. it goes in line with the "mythical man month". 2 programmers working on the same thing might be worth 1.8 programmers. Or 10. YMMV.
In case anyone was wondering, these *kinds* of centralized-big-iron system DOWNTIME issues happened "back in the day", back in the 70's, when everybody used timesharing systems, nobody had a PC, etc. etc. and if the "big iron" went down, EVERYBODY went down.
The cloud is HIGHLY overrated. There have been *SEVERAL* attempts at re-leveraging the "megaserver, light client" paradigm, when the more OBVIOUS thing to leverage was the 'distributed computing' capabilities of "all of those smart clients".
in any case, "the cloud" is *HIGHLY* overrated.
It seems to me that the marketeers *STILL* don't understand why PC sales are down. I've explained this before, and I'll do it again. Captain Obvious (me) says "no need to thank me"
1. Moore's law stopped making the user-perceived speed of next year's computer 50% faster than this year's computer.
2. MS hasn't put out a good OS since 7, and they're generally perceived as being *INFERIOR* than what people already have (in one way or another, from appearance to performance to features to whatever). Win-10-nic fanbois will disagree and downvote me because I said this.
3. because of 1 and 2, people aren't replacing old computers. maybe they get a new hard drive, but they don't need to upgrade something that works.
4. the economy stinks because of bad gummint policies, and it's giving people less disposable income, so VANITY 'new computer' sales aren't happening, either.
So yeah, as predicted, slabs did NOT replace desktops or notebooks. marketeers were looking at 'new computer sales' as if people threw their existing computers out every year, and "not buying a new one" means you don't have an EXISTING one (or that getting a slab meant that the PC desktop went in the trash). OBVIOUSLY not the case. But they didn't think of that at all. No, they just look at DERIVATIVE numbers, thinking it's an INTEGRAL.
The question, then, is what will businesses do when MICROSOFT! STOPS! SELLING! W7PRO! IN! OCTOBER!!!
"Ape" (8.x) won't be much of an option, either. It may be time for the business world to consider a Linux-based alternative.
(had to edit the title, it was too long)
"Flash has caused so much grief for so many people. It is clear that sites that make heavy use of it have a lot to answer for."
Yes, especially considering that people with phones and certain kinds of intarweb service PAY FOR BANDWIDTH OVERAGES one way or another (either speed throttling, or extra $ paid to telco) so those IRRITATING ADVERTISEMENTS are AS BAD AS E-MAIL SPAM, as if your weekly advertisement dead-tree junkmail was ALL! SENT! WITH! POSTAGE! DUE!!!
So Microsoft "grew a clue" today. Good. Job. <slow clap>
(if advertisers could do it, they'd reach out of our monitors and rub our noses in the ads)
"Well as a Linux user I would welcome you into the fold if you intend to join us :)"
Thanks, and don't forget FreeBSD too. most of my Linux stuff has either been embedded or "targeted device" kinds of programming. I've been off/on working on a toolkit for cross-platform development for several years, though. X11 has its own difficulties, and "all those toolkits" create their own versions of DLL hell. [I like static linking]. Haven't seen or heard of anything better. Should get it finished "some day" as long as Wayland doesn't change the rules on me...
APPLICATIONS are the key: if major 'broad use' application authors [not just Firefox, Chrome, VLC] had legit Linux versions of their applications, MANY more people would consider a Linux desktop and avoid Microsoft's stupid "the STORE" and windows 10 in general. Intuit uses Java from what I hear, so they SHOULD be able to do it with Turbo Tax, Quickbooks, etc. but I haven't heard of Linux versions of ANY of these. However, if it's true they're using Java, they'd be on board REALLY FAST if a major shift DOES happen.
THAT, and hardware makers SHIPPING THE LINUX BOXEN at slightly reduced cost because they're NOT paying the WINDOWS LICENSE. In fact, they shouldn't MAKE anything that is NOT Linux compatible, to protect THEMSELVES from the eventual BACKLASH. [that means the ability to opt-out of 'secure boot' among other things, so you can install ANY operating system you want on it]
yeah - avoiding the Micro-shaft toll booth at ALL roadblocks.
"Unfortunately for Microsoft, developers did not rush to build Store apps, and users continued primarily to run old-style desktop applications, because that was why they used Windows."
That, AND that "the METRO" interface is FLUGLY (flat,ugly), WAY too fat-finger friendly, and reminds me of child-drawn art (and not in a good way). So why should people WANT to use something ugly? (It's bad for the psyche)
But "the ugly" isn't the MAIN reason "the Store" isn't being used: "The Store" is just a TOLLBOOTH for developers, and there's no POSSIBLE 'marketing advantage' for putting "yours too" into a ginormous pile filled with zillions of existing [CR]apps, ones not easily distinguished from those few things that are actually USEFUL.
"Microsoft's approach now is to make the AppX installation files used by the UWP standard for all kinds of Windows applications. In some ways it is the next generation of Windows Installer."
i.e. pay a toll to distribute your application, particularly BAD for shareware and freeware applications, and place them into a ginormous monolithic "store" that's already "full of [CR]apps". I suppose some form of 'payola' comes next so that your 'app(sic)' gets some form of 'search priority' over the next guy... (self-slap for giving Microsoft that idea)
So instead, you can create an 'AppX' that you can deploy EITHER through "the Store" _OR_ from your own thingy? What advantage is THAT ?
"Provided [that] an AppX has been signed with a trusted digital certificate"
Oh, a DIGITAL CERTIFICATE - that you have to BUY from some "Partner" of Microsoft. Right. YET ANOTHER "tollbooth" to discourage open source and independent developers. Device drivers having to have this (since Vista) is BAD ENOUGH ALREADY. But *NOW* the APPLICATIONS THEMSELVES?
What ever happened to "Developers, Developers, Developers, Developers"??? (run over after being placed under the bus)
And then, there's this: "'You never have to write an installer ever again,' said Sheehan."
I already WROTE one, so why do I need an INFERIOR model to take its place? And why put my appLICATION into "the STORE" where it's buried in a big pile of [shaving cream]?
You generally do not have to do much for an installer anyway, _IF_ you statically link, don't use ".Not", and do some kind of very simple version control. Or if you're me, you already WROTE one, over a decade ago. Now, if your version of an application is 34 "redistributable shared component" DLLs of various makes and models, slapped together with a single "glue" executable, then maybe you might want this... because *THAT* sounds a LOT like one of those "the Store" 'apps(sic)' to me.
So, looks like Micro-shaft needs to scrape revenue from EVERY APPLICATION INSTALL in addition to annual subscriptions. And they think we're just going to ACCEPT THIS?
I'm not happy seeing Gnome 3 - FBSD hung onto gnome 2 like, forever, and it became very stable as a result. The constant instabilities from gnome's "development" cause a LOT of problems in FreeBSD a while back, and I was GLAD to see it stop (I hated having to fix week-long ports builds because of gnome). Of course, there's always Mate, which is essentially gnome 2, but any "default" using Gnome 3 is just a *HUGE* *MISTAKE*.
was this written by Tay or a human?
just curious...
/me voting for "human". even if Tay was simply programmed to do it, it was still a human that would've generated the content.
also the targeting of 4chan is interesting. that place is still a cesspit, no doubt, with or without moot. so did they claim responsibility for trolling Tay into being "whatever" ?
I'd like to see multiple Tay-bots that I could play with, try different things, see what comes up.
But if I *really* wanna piss off Redmond, I'd convince Tay into being a Tea Party Donald Trump supporter. Let's make America GREAT again, right Tay? Repeat after me...
"And server-side javascript (or PHP)."
don't forget CLIENT-SIDE java script, and the BANDWIDTH THEFT it introduces. It sort of justifies putting it on the server instead (cached intelligently), to avoid a zillion people hitting their bandwidth caps just to download "all that script" from whatever CDNs are hosting it, EVERY! SINGLE! TIME!!
or, for those of us who are 'bandwidth challenged', same thing.
and of course, BAD CODE on a CDN will break the intarwebs, too...
