Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:LOL ... (Score 1) 35

by Bacon Bits (#47892339) Attached to: HP Buys Cloud Provider, Gets Marten Mickos To Head Its Cloud Division

Either this is a technology failure, or HP has been trying very hard to ensure that nobody could possibly find their documentation.

Well, HP is a Fortune 500 company, so it's probably both.

Why fail merely through incompetence or ineptness when you can do both? You can legitimately classify every minor bug as WONTFIX - As Designed, and every major bug can be fixed as a design error in the next version of your hardware that costs 10% more. Obsolescence through incompetence is the major business model of the modern world.

Comment: Cry me a river. (Score 1) 211

With Kickstarter, you're expected to produce what you get funded to do. Usually, what the backers get in return is a copy of the game, and little else. If the game sucks or doesn't sell, the backers are shit out of luck and the founders get a lot of bad press. That's about it.

Before Kickstarter, you had to seek out investors or venture capitalists. You know what they want in return? A monetary share of the profits with a value somewhat greater than their investment. You drop the ball and you end up in court. They want to see your account books. They want the source code and any assets you produced.

Guess what? Kickstarter's fad phase is over. Now you have to show your work. Too many projects didn't deliver, or didn't deliver on enough. Too many assholes have poisoned the well and people are going to be wary about drinking. I suspect Steam's Greenlight will do the same thing. Too many games get released as "early alpha" and then the devs get the money and stop development or development slows to a crawl. Greenlight now feels like "buy a prototype" and Kickstarter feels like "fund a pipe dream." People don't want dreams and prototypes. They want fully fleshed out games!

Comment: Re:Driver's versus passenger - does it really matt (Score 1) 363

by Bacon Bits (#47872629) Attached to: Text While Driving In Long Island and Have Your Phone Disabled

If your car has an interlock installed, any driver would need to use it to start the vehicle.

It's not meant to be convenient. That it's onerous is entirely intentional. It's meant to punish you by forcibly preventing illegal behavior. It provides an alternative between a fine and a suspended license. That's all. Interlocks aren't installed for first time offenders. It's likely this will be the same. Don't like it? Stop risking other peoples lives.

Comment: Re:Powershell (Score 5, Interesting) 729

Two reasons:

1. POSIX environments have already been done on Windows, and they universally suck. SFU/Interix is shit. Cygwin is shit. MKS Toolkit is shit. MinGW/MSYS, which does a better job than any of them, is mostly shit. Even UnxUtils, which is just binaries modified for use with the actual Windows cmd shell are mostly shit. There are so many fundamental differences of philosophy that make working with a Windows system as though it were a POSIX system fundamentally untenable. You're stuck with mostly just munging text files in a binary world.

2. Powershell is what .NET developers think Windows administrators want in a shell. That's why you're allowed to do stuff like import .NET assemblies and use essentially unmodified C# code, but there's still no native SFTP client or server.

Powershell is about 90% of what an administrator actually wants in a shell, and it's actually not that bad. Compared to cmd.exe or VBscript it's balls out fantastic. However, an administrator shouldn't need to learn about .NET objects to be able to write a script, and they shouldn't feel like there's such a fundamental separation between what the shell can do with .NET piping and what executable programs can do. There's a very real encouragement to make everything in Powershell written in and with Powershell exclusively. Like no calling of a binary to do something unless you have no other choice. The shell and the community philosophy very much discourage that... for no real reason other than it's more difficult to get a .NET object out of a binary file and manipulate it with arbitrary .NET methods. I've seen people re-implement a command line zip program with [System.IO.Compression] instead of just using 7z.exe. Why? Just so they can use .NET objects that they never do anything with.

Honestly I really love Powershell, but I wish the philosophy were geared more around getting shit done than getting shit done with .NET.

Comment: Re:So start organizing (Score 4, Interesting) 108

by Bacon Bits (#47607801) Attached to: LinkedIn Busted In Wage Theft Investigation

No the dirty secret is when IT people are young we are all naive, idealistic Libertarians who couldn't fathom the idea that Labor might need protection from Capital when the Free Market can clearly fix all ills if only the government would get out of the way. When we're older one of two things has happened: we're in management and on the other side of the table, or we're still in the trenches and we'd rather dangle in the breeze than swallow the bitter pill of our own reality or try to convince the new, naive. idealistic, Libertarian junior coworker that he's getting the shit end of the stick on purpose.

Comment: Re:its why devs cringe. (Score 1) 180

by Bacon Bits (#47576415) Attached to: PHP Finally Getting a Formal Specification

Putting aside the whole whitespace debate(*), I'm pretty sure that python has its own list of issues. Maybe not to the same extent as PHP, but they exist.

Picking a programming language is like picking an application, though. It's not about picking the syntax. That's not particularly relevant unless you're looking at Brainfuck or INTERCAL or GW-BASIC. You start by deciding what capabilities you need. There are inevitably several choices that meet your technical requirements, so in the end you're picking a language based on whatever set of limitations and issues you're willing to work with.

Comment: Re:Its Fine. - not (Score 4, Insightful) 348

Application support always says to turn off everything that might possibly interfere with their precious application. They would have you shut down the operating system if they didn't need it. Application support lives in a fairy land where the only thing they have to worry about is their application. They don't have to fix anything if the application isn't broken. They have no interest in anything else. A good vendor will program their application to work with the system standards. Most ISVs are not good vendors.

As a system or network admin, you have to protect the application from the rest of the network and protect the rest of the network from the application and protect everything from the users and the Internet. Part of doing that is firewalling the crap out of your core network, and if you can't do that you should be looking at adding more VLANs and controlling traffic that way.

People are always available for work in the past tense.