Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


Forgot your password?

Comment: Re:Systemd and Gnome3 == no thanks (Score 5, Insightful) 260

by Junta (#49612109) Attached to: Ubuntu 15.04 Received Well By Linux Community

The 'article' is an editorial presented as something to be taken as representative of the community at large. My impression is that Canonical is losing mindshare quickly to Mint on the desktop, that Canonical really doesn't care that much about desktop anyway as they pin their business hopes and dreams on servers and embedded (where it also is failing to get much traction business wise).

Note that none of this has to do with the parents referenced points: Gnome 3 (which is largely defined by Gnome Shell, which Ubuntu doesn't even use by default) and systemd (I'm sympathetic, but not sure it's making much of a difference either way in the desktop distribution selection right now).

Comment: Re:K Bye. (Score 1) 224

by Junta (#49595679) Attached to: Grooveshark Shuts Down

I suspect that the situation is more complicated than that. Multiple recording labels, multiple interests. All the licensing of the music would revert to square one, with all the current copies having to be disposed of.

The world of intellectual property is too complicated for this sort of thing to be easy, sadly. I also never used Grooveshark. I'm still mostly a broadcast radio kind of person when it comes to music.

Comment: Re:Yes, but.. (Score 1) 317

by Junta (#49595489) Attached to: Mozilla Begins To Move Towards HTTPS-Only Web

Yes, in that scenario, you aren't restricted by firefox's proposed BS. Disabling https would break mozilla browser access, but not such software.

I still think it's an inadequately thought out concept (I also question the wisdom of 'the only network protocol is http' mentality in the world), but out-of-browser development shouldn't be hurt too badly.

Comment: Re:Yes, but.. (Score 1) 317

by Junta (#49595471) Attached to: Mozilla Begins To Move Towards HTTPS-Only Web

the same holds everywhere.

Now I won't go that far. 'everywhere' is a pretty gigantic scope. There are many scenarios where there are no viable debug capabilities on either end of the connection (either because no such capability is implemented *or* you are dealing with some 'clever' appliance that blocks you from access.

Besides, wireshark's dissectors are incredibly useful, and usually beyond other things ability to decode. In the case of *browsers* specifically it's not true these days, but plenty of networking things aren't at that level.

Comment: Precisely this... (Score 1) 317

by Junta (#49594005) Attached to: Mozilla Begins To Move Towards HTTPS-Only Web

While TLS *could* be secure, I've been in too many discussions where it is assumed to be the only way to be secure and that it is secure in spite of the current state of CAs and the practical behavior of internal servers with respect to certificates.

There really needs to be more critical discussion along this front, as I see quite reasonable security strategies that fare well in the *real* world torn up and replaced with TLS because of an idealized view of how it could be implemented.

Comment: Yes, but.. (Score 2) 317

by Junta (#49593929) Attached to: Mozilla Begins To Move Towards HTTPS-Only Web

Wireshark is a useful debugging tool. The ability to snap off encryption to analyze things at the wire is a lifesaver.

That said, if I'm debugging something a browser is doing, the developer console is usually better anyway. There remains the case where you are trying to debug a tester's experience without access to their browser, but the scenarios where that is true *and* it would be a good idea to disable TLS are limited. Being able to disable encryption is more important for clients that aren't so developer-enabled.

Comment: Re:K Bye. (Score 1) 224

by Junta (#49593169) Attached to: Grooveshark Shuts Down

I agree that the more intelligent thing would have been for the site branding to be used for legitimate service rather than trying to shame the users while pointing out other services and hoping for the best.

However, the likelihood that they could have modified it 'slightly' while 'not pissing off the listeners' is pretty slim. The music selection would have had to be torched and started over from scratch (too many content owners without an agreement between them) and something would have had to give to actually extract revenue.

Comment: Re:K Bye. (Score 4, Insightful) 224

by Junta (#49592893) Attached to: Grooveshark Shuts Down

They didn't quite get to 'just walk away'. They were given a choice, an impossibly high fine to pay or hand over all their patents, copyrights, infrastructure, software, basically everything while very publicly scraping the ground about how wrong what they did was.

Essentially, they had something of value that was interesting to the plaintiffs that was bigger than their realistic chances at getting actual money out of them.

Comment: Re:Or a simple solution. (Score 1) 95

by Junta (#49437533) Attached to: Microsoft Creates a Docker-Like Container For Windows

I would go further and say that while before some projects would feel some pressure to do cleaner packaging and deploy better alongside other applications and into 'OSes', many are starting to say 'here, just take a container' and never fix packaging issues because... container! What is a good workaround for some fundamental limitations has become a crutch to be extraordinarily lazy in packaging.

Comment: Re:Lies, bullshit, and more lies ... (Score 1) 442

If you get a *better* offer while working at one place, sure an H-1B has at least that ability.

However if they get laid off/fired, things can get very rough fast. So an H-1B holder has a lot more to lose if they can't survive a layoff or get fired. Sure there is a grace period, but depending on the circumstances, that grace period isn't nearly enough to be confident you can go from surprise termination to accepting another job.

Comment: Re:Lies, bullshit, and more lies ... (Score 3, Interesting) 442

The playing field is distorted by the current H1-B system.

For a citizen, the employer has not much more leverage over the employee than they should have (I think health insurance managed by the employer is something that should be changed, but that's beside the point).

For an H1-B, an employer can pretty much deport the employee. That is not a level playing field. That is an entirely different power dynamic that favors the employer unreasonably so.

Comment: Re:It's the cloud (Score 1) 146

by Junta (#49417739) Attached to: The New Struggles Facing Open Source

I don't know about his cut off point (might be on the low side), but there is an inflection point where the providers economies of scale aren't adding value for your organization and instead you just are paying for their costs and their profit.

If you are effectively tying up more than a rack of real equipment in two availability zones or more, you may well be in the territory of being able to save money by coming *off* the cloud.

It's like owning a box truck versus going to U-Haul. If you move something once in a blue moon, you go to U-Haul because owning a truck is too much for occasional use. If however you are a moving company, owning one or more big box trucks will be cheaper than renting.

Comment: Re:It's the cloud (Score 2) 146

by Junta (#49417681) Attached to: The New Struggles Facing Open Source

It's nowhere near as clunky as Google Drive (Do you really want to have to trust them with your data?)

If you don't trust Google, then why trust Microsoft? The degree of trust in the solution should be skeptical. This is of course likely to be fine by a lot of people, but we shouldn't pretend MS is a more or less trustworthy entity than any of their competitors at this junction. Ideally the protection of the data and the storage of the data are provided by two distinct entities (and the protection code audited for security and to be sure it is doing what it promises).

Do you want Apple taking over and forcing everyone to use the same hardware and lock down everything you develop?

Nope, but MS would gladly do that in a heartbeat if they got enough clout. Same goes for Google or really any sufficiently 'successful' commercial entity. This is why mono

In general I think I understand your point, but anything getting a monopolistic hold on a market generally does not go nice places for the consumers.

Comment: Just get to know your team (Score 1) 261

You have a small enough team to just gather their feedback rather than posters on a forum. You have an opportunity for more tailored measures to make a good environment, though a challenge that some ideal changes are likely to be impractical to achieve for such a small team. For example if you don't have offices and they want offices, construction isn't going to happen for a team of 6. The types of things you can do are likely to be highly subjective.

For example, some people do best with morale boost by having their manager focus on the bright side without going much into the bad aspects of the current larger situation. I personally prefer the manager to be straight with me about precisely how we are doing, how we are falling short, and maybe I can think about how perhaps something can be fixed (or suggest when I think it's time to throw in the tile and focus on more productive things.

If you are in a larger company that does stack ranking, then review time is going to suck for at least 1 or 2 of your team no matter how awesome things are going.

No directory.