Search Results

Search found 36809 results on 1473 pages for 'policy based design'.

Page 31/1473 | < Previous Page | 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38  | Next Page >

  • Why is it a good practice to wrap all primitives and Strings?

    - by Amogh Talpallikar
    According to Jeff Bay's Essay on Object Callisthenics, One of the practices is set to be "Wrap all primitives and Strings" Can anyone elaborate on this ? In languages where we already have wrappers for primitives like C# and Java. and In languages where Collections can have generics where you are sure of what type goes into the collection, do we need to wrap string's inside their own classes ? Does it have any other advantage ?

    Read the article

  • AI for a mixed Turn Based + Real Time battle system - Something "Gambit like" the right approach?

    - by Jason L.
    This is maybe a question that's been asked 100 times 1,000 different ways. I apologize for that :) I'm in the process of building the AI for a game I'm working on. The game is a turn based one, in the vein of Final Fantasy but also has a set of things that happen in real time (reactions). I've experimented with FSM, HFSMs, and Behavior Trees. None of them felt "right" to me and all felt either too limiting or too generic / big. The idea I'm toying with now is something like a "Rules engine" that could be likened to the Gambit system from Final Fantasy 12. I would have a set of predefined personalities. Each of these personalities would have a set of conditions it would check on each event (Turn start, time to react, etc). These conditions would be priority ordered, and the first one that returns true would be the action I take. These conditions can also point to a "choice" action, which is just an action that will make a choice based on some Utility function. Sort of a mix of FSM/HFSM and a Utility Function approach. So, a "gambit" with the personality of "Healer" may look something like this: (ON) Ally HP = 0% - Choose "Relife" spell (ON) Ally HP < 50% - Choose Heal spell (ON) Self HP < 65% - Choose Heal spell (ON) Ally Debuff - Choose Debuff Removal spell (ON) Ally Lost Buff - Choose Buff spell Likewise, a "gambit" with the personality of "Agressor" may look like this: (ON) Foe HP < 10% - Choose Attack skill (ON) Foe any - Choose target - Choose Attack skill (ON) Self Lost Buff - Choose Buff spell (ON) Foe HP = 0% - Taunt the player What I like about this approach is it makes sense in my head. It also would be extremely easy to build an "AI Editor" with an approach like this. What I'm worried about is.. would it be too limiting? Would it maybe get too complicated? Does anyone have any experience with AIs in Turn Based games that could maybe provide me some insight into this approach.. or suggest a different approach? Many thanks in advance!!!

    Read the article

  • Should database-models (conceptual or physical) be reviewed by DBAs?

    - by user61852
    Where I work, new applications that are being developed that will use their own relational database, must have their database-models (conceptual, then physical ) reviewed and aproved by DBAs. Things looked after are normalization, antipatterns, table and column naming standards, etc. Is this really a DBA's responsability to do this ? or should it be, in a greater extend, the responsability of app designers and architects ?

    Read the article

  • Best practice to propagate preferences of application

    - by Shebuka
    What is your approach with propagation to all classes/windows of preferences/settings of your application? Do you share the preference_manager class to all classes/windows who need it or you make variables in each classes/windows and update them manually each time setting are changed? Currently I have a PreferencesInterface class that hold all preferences and is responsible to default all values with a dedicated method called on create and when needed, all values are public, so non getters/setters, also it have virtual SavePreferences/LoadPreferences methods. Then I have PreferencesManager that extends from PreferencesInterface and is responsible for actually implementation of SavePreferences/LoadPreferences. I've made this basically for cross-platform so that every platform can have a different implementation of actual storage (registry, ini, plist, xml, whatever).

    Read the article

  • How do you think about an Application Generator? [closed]

    - by Mehdi Sheyda
    I'm designing an application-generating application. It is an application that takes the requirements of customer as inputs , analyzes the requirements, creates classes and produces program files in C#. I am at the beginning of this project and have a long way to go with this application. Do you have an experience with designing similar kinds of projects? What risks might I encounter with this project?

    Read the article

  • DDD: Service or Repository

    - by tikhop
    I am developing an app in DDD manner. And I have a little problem with it. I have a Fare (airline fare) and FareRepository objects. And at some point I should load additional fare information and set this information to existing Fare. I guess that I need to create an Application Service (FareAdditionalInformationService) that will deal with obtaining data from the server and than update existing Fare. However, some people said me that it is necessary to use FareRepository for this problem. I don't know wich place is better for my problem Service or Repository.

    Read the article

  • Please help me give this principle a name

    - by Brent Arias
    As a designer, I like providing interfaces that cater to a power/simplicity balance. For example, I think the LINQ designers followed that principle because they offered both dot-notation and query-notation. The first is more powerful, but the second is easier to read and follow. If you disagree with my assessment of LINQ, please try to see my point anyway; LINQ was just an example, my post is not about LINQ. I call this principle "dial-able power". But I'd like to know what other people call it. Certainly some will say "KISS" is the common term. But I see KISS as a superset, or a "consumerism" practice. Using LINQ as my example again, in my view, a team of programmers who always try to use query notation over dot-notation are practicing KISS. Thus the LINQ designers practiced "dial-able power", whereas the LINQ consumers practice KISS. The two make beautiful music together. I'll give another example. Imagine a C# logging tool that has two signatures allowing two uses: void Write(string message); void Write(Func<string> messageCallback); The purpose of the two signatures is to fulfill these needs: //Every-day "simple" usage, nothing special. myLogger.Write("Something Happened" + error.ToString() ); //This is performance critical, do not call ToString() if logging is //disabled. myLogger.Write( () => { "Something Happened" + error.ToString() }); Having these overloads represents "dial-able power," because the consumer has the choice of a simple interface or a powerful interface. A KISS-loving consumer will use the simpler signature most of the time, and will allow the "busy" looking signature when the power is needed. This also helps self-documentation, because usage of the powerful signature tells the reader that the code is performance critical. If the logger had only the powerful signature, then there would be no "dial-able power." So this comes full-circle. I'm happy to keep my own "dial-able power" coinage if none yet exists, but I can't help think I'm missing an obvious designation for this practice. p.s. Another example that is related, but is not the same as "dial-able power", is Scott Meyer's principle "make interfaces easy to use correctly, and hard to use incorrectly."

    Read the article

  • Should each app have its own database, or should small apps be merged into one?

    - by King
    We have a bunch of small to medium sized apps, each of which has its own database (MSSQL Server). There was a suggestion that we consoldate the 'related' databases into a smaller set amount of larger databases. They don't particularly share a lot of data, they would just be under a similar business group. For example, using a 'Finance' DB to hold the tables and procedures for finance apps. Would it be appropriate to use a different schema for each app? E.g. App1.SomeTable App1.SomeOtherTable AppTwo.SomeTable What are the pros and cons of this approach? What should I watch out for? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Is it a good practice to wrap all primitives and Strings?

    - by Amogh Talpallikar
    According to Jeff Bay's Essay on Object Callisthenics, One of the practices is set to be "Wrap all primitives and Strings" Can anyone elaborate on this ? In languages where we already have wrappers for primitives like C# and Java. and In languages where Collections can have generics where you are sure of what type goes into the collection, do we need to wrap string's inside their own classes ? Does it have any other advantage ?

    Read the article

  • Single database, multiple system dependency

    - by davenewza
    Consider an environment where we have a single, core database, with many separate systems using this one database. This leads to all of these systems have a common dependency, which ultimately introduces coupling between them. This means that we cannot always evolve systems independently of each other. Structural changes to the database (even if only intended for one, particular system), requires a full sweep test of ALL systems, and may require that other systems be 'patched' and subsequently released. This is especially tricky when you want to have separate teams working on different projects. What is a good 'pattern' to help in avoiding such coupling? I would imagine that a database should be exclusively depended on by one system. If other systems require data for whatever reason, they should request such from an API service of some kind. A drawback of this approach which comes to mind is performance: routing data between high-throughput systems through service calls is much slower than through a database connection.

    Read the article

  • How to create a fountain in UDK

    - by user36425
    I'm trying to make a fountain in my level in UDK, I made the base of the fountain by using a Cylinder build and now I'm trying to put water in it. I went to use the fluidSurfaceActor but I notice that this is square but my fountain is a cylinder. Is there a way that I can change the shape of the fluidSurfaceActor to fit the builder brush shape or is there another way to do this? Or is it hopeless and I have to make my fountain into a cube? Here is a link/picture to the screenprint of what I'm talking about:

    Read the article

  • My boss has a different idea of a website's UX [migrated]

    - by NicoJuicy
    Let me explain the situation. I started transforming a "old (.Net 2.0)" Application into a webapplication. Problem here is, that no-one here is really acquainted with the UX of a website (Simple, efficient). Eventhough, i still have to regard that the website can be tailored to a customer needs through parameters (yeah, i know :s ) For example: I wanted to have a layout similar to invoicemachine (= as simple as possible). -- He wants a Ribbon toolbar. Going to a supplier gives the list of supplier -- He wants to display the "Create Supplier" screen where you can use the wildcards in a certain textbox, to search for a specific Supplier and then give the list of the suppliers. Also, i need 4 search/filter mechanisms: people can search per field with wildmarks can filter the suppliers search a keyword through all the data of a supplier filter the "list Suppliers" page by the first letter of the name. LIST Suppliers | A | D | Z Adam Wrincle ADD |EDIT |Delete Damzel InDistress ADD |EDIT |Delete Zorro ADD |EDIT |Delete I can't seem to get through to him, that the UX of a website needs to be differently than a Windows Application. If he wants to bring all the logic of the windows app into a website, why letting me build a website then? Stick to the old solution. Am i mistaking so hard or how could i convince / show him that an online-solution is something different than the offline solution. He already "saw" online solutions of other applications to get an idea, but if i suggest something he won't listen (if it's GUI / UX related, that is).

    Read the article

  • How do I choose the scaling factor of a 3D game world?

    - by concept3d
    I am making a 3D tank game prototype with some physics simulation, am using C++. One of the decisions I need to make is the scale of the game world in relation to reality. For example, I could consider 1 in-game unit of measurement to correspond to 1 meter in reality. This feels intuitive, but I feel like I might be missing something. I can think of the following as potential problems: 3D modelling program compatibility. (?) Numerical accuracy. (Does this matter?) Especially at large scales, how games like Battlefield have huge maps: How don't they lose numerical accuracy if they use 1:1 mapping with real world scale, since floating point representation tend to lose more precision with larger numbers (e.g. with ray casting, physics simulation)? Gameplay. I don't want the movement of units to feel slow or fast while using almost real world values like -9.8 m/s^2 for gravity. (This might be subjective.) Is it ok to scale up/down imported assets or it's best fit with a world with its original scale? Rendering performance. Are large meshes with the same vertex count slower to render? I'm wondering if I should split this into multiple questions...

    Read the article

  • How can one manage thousands of IF...THEN...ELSE rules?

    - by David
    I am considering building an application, which, at its core, would consist of thousands of if...then...else statements. The purpose of the application is to be able to predict how cows move around in any landscape. They are affected by things like the sun, wind, food source, sudden events etc. How can such an application be managed? I imagine that after a few hundred IF-statements, it would be as good as unpredictable how the program would react and debugging what lead to a certain reaction would mean that one would have to traverse the whole IF-statement tree every time. I have read a bit about rules engines, but I do not see how they would get around this complexity.

    Read the article

  • Understanding Visitor Pattern

    - by Nezreli
    I have a hierarchy of classes that represents GUI controls. Something like this: Control-ContainerControl-Form I have to implement a series of algoritms that work with objects doing various stuff and I'm thinking that Visitor pattern would be the cleanest solution. Let take for example an algorithm which creates a Xml representaion of a hierarchy of objects. Using 'classic' approach I would do this: public abstract class Control { public virtual XmlElement ToXML(XmlDocument document) { XmlElement xml = document.CreateElement(this.GetType().Name); // Create element, fill it with attributes declared with control return xml; } } public abstract class ContainerControl : Control { public override XmlElement ToXML(XmlDocument document) { XmlElement xml = base.ToXML(document); // Use forech to fill XmlElement with child XmlElements return xml; } } public class Form : ContainerControl { public override XmlElement ToXML(XmlDocument document) { XmlElement xml = base.ToXML(document); // Fill remaining elements declared in Form class return xml; } } But I'm not sure how to do this with visitor pattern. This is the basic implementation: public class ToXmlVisitor : IVisitor { public void Visit(Form form) { } } Since even the abstract classes help with implementation I'm not sure how to do that properly in ToXmlVisitor. Perhaps there is a better solution to this problem. The reason that I'm considering Visitor pattern is that some algorithms will need references not available in project where the classes are implemented and there is a number of different algorithms so I'm avoiding large classes. Any thoughts are welcome.

    Read the article

  • Resources for popular domain models

    - by Songo
    I have come across many situations where I had to build a system for a library or a clinic or other popular domains. The thing is a domain model for a library was probably done 1000 times already with different level of details of course. Here is an example. Is there a popular website or community where one can find ready made domain models for popular systems? The whole purpose I'm trying to achieve is to quickly get a grasp of the domain I'm modeling and customize it to my needs. Re-inventing the wheel seems really absurd when the same system might have been modeled properly previously. Note I know Google might sound like the perfect source, but there is a repository out there that people can post there models, so that others can share them.

    Read the article

  • DDD and filtering

    - by tikhop
    I am developing an app in ddd maner. So I have a complex domain model. Suppose I have a Fare object and Airline. Each Airline should contain several or much more Fares. My UI should represent Model (only small part of complex model) as a list of Airline, when the user select the Airline, I must show the list of Fares. User can filtering the Fares (by travel time, cost, etc.). What is the appropriate place for filtering Fares and Airlines? I am assuming that I should do it in ViewModel. Like: My domain model has wrapped with Service Layer - UI works with ViewModel - ViewModel obtain data from Service Layer filtering it and create DTO objects for UI. Or I'm wrong?

    Read the article

  • Domain Models (PHP)

    - by Calum Bulmer
    I have been programming in PHP for several years and have, in the past, adopted methods of my own to handle data within my applications. I have built my own MVC, in the past, and have a reasonable understanding of OOP within php but I know my implementation needs some serious work. In the past I have used an is-a relationship between a model and a database table. I now know after doing some research that this is not really the best way forward. As far as I understand it I should create models that don't really care about the underlying database (or whatever storage mechanism is to be used) but only care about their actions and their data. From this I have established that I can create models of lets say for example a Person an this person object could have some Children (human children) that are also Person objects held in an array (with addPerson and removePerson methods, accepting a Person object). I could then create a PersonMapper that I could use to get a Person with a specific 'id', or to save a Person. This could then lookup the relationship data in a lookup table and create the associated child objects for the Person that has been requested (if there are any) and likewise save the data in the lookup table on the save command. This is now pushing the limits to my knowledge..... What if I wanted to model a building with different levels and different rooms within those levels? What if I wanted to place some items in those rooms? Would I create a class for building, level, room and item with the following structure. building can have 1 or many level objects held in an array level can have 1 or many room objects held in an array room can have 1 or many item objects held in an array and mappers for each class with higher level mappers using the child mappers to populate the arrays (either on request of the top level object or lazy load on request) This seems to tightly couple the different objects albeit in one direction (ie. a floor does not need to be in a building but a building can have levels) Is this the correct way to go about things? Within the view I am wanting to show a building with an option to select a level and then show the level with an option to select a room etc.. but I may also want to show a tree like structure of items in the building and what level and room they are in. I hope this makes sense. I am just struggling with the concept of nesting objects within each other when the general concept of oop seems to be to separate things. If someone can help it would be really useful. Many thanks

    Read the article

  • Liskov substitution and abstract classes / strategy pattern

    - by Kolyunya
    I'm trying to follow LSP in practical programming. And I wonder if different constructors of subclasses violate it. It would be great to hear an explanation instead of just yes/no. Thanks much! P.S. If the answer is no, how do I make different strategies with different input without violating LSP? class IStrategy { public: virtual void use() = 0; }; class FooStrategy : public IStrategy { public: FooStrategy(A a, B b) { c = /* some operations with a, b */ } virtual void use() { std::cout << c; } private: C c; }; class BarStrategy : public IStrategy { public: BarStrategy(D d, E e) { f = /* some operations with d, e */ } virtual void use() { std::cout << f; } private: F f; };

    Read the article

  • How to use DI and DI containers

    - by Pinetree
    I am building a small PHP mvc framework (yes, yet another one), mostly for learning purposes, and I am trying to do it the right way, so I'd like to use a DI container, but I am not asking which one to use but rather how to use one. Without going into too much detail, the mvc is divided into modules which have controllers which render views for actions. This is how a request is processed: a Main object instantiates a Request object, and a Router, and injects the Request into the Router to figure out which module was called. then it instantiates the Module object and sends the Request to that the Module creates a ModuleRouter and sends the Request to figure out the controller and action it then creates the Controller and the ViewRenderer, and injects the ViewRenderer into the Controller (so that the controller can send data to the view) the ViewRenderer needs to know which module, controller and action were called to figure out the path to the view scripts, so the Module has to figure out this and inject it to the ViewRenderer the Module then calls the action method on the controller and calls the render method on the ViewRenderer For now, I do not have any DI container set up, but what I do have are a bunch of initX() methods that create the required component if it is not already there. For instance, the Module has the initViewRenderer() method. These init methods get called right before that component is needed, not before, and if the component was already set it will not initialize it. This allows for the components to be switched, but it does not require manually setting them if they are not there. Now, I'd like to do this by implementing a DI container, but still keep the manual configuration to a bare minimum, so if the directory structure and naming convention is followed, everything should work, without even touching the config. If I use the DI container, do I then inject it into everything (the container would inject itself when creating a component), so that other components can use it? When do I register components with the DI? Can a component register other components with the DI during run-time? Do I create a 'common' config and use that? How do I then figure out on the fly which components I need and how they need to be set up? If Main uses Router which uses Request, Main then needs to use the container to get Module (or does the module need to be found and set beforehand? How?) Module uses Router but needs to figure out the settings for the ViewRenderer and the Controller on the fly, not in advance, so my DI container can't be setting those on the Module before the module figures out the controller and action... What if the controller needs some other service? Do I inject the container into every controller? If I start doing that, I might just inject it into everything... Basically I am looking for the best practices when dealing with stuff like this. I know what DI is and what DI containers do, but I am looking for guidance to using them in real life, and not some isolated examples on the net. Sorry for the lengthy post and many thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • creating a pre-menu level select screen

    - by Ephiras
    Hi I am working on creating a tower Defence java applet game and have come to a road block about implementing a title screen that i can select the level and difficulty of the rest of the game. my title screen class is called Menu. from this menu class i need to pass in many different variables into my Main class. i have used different classes before and know how to run them and such. but if both classes extend applet and each has its individual graphics method how can i run things from Main even though it was created in Menu. what i essentially want to do is run the Menu class withits action listeners and graphics until a Difficulty button has been selected, run the main class (which 100% works without having to have the Menu class) and pretty much terminate Menu so that i cannot go back to it, do not see its buttons or graphics menus. can i run one applet annd when i choose a button close that one and launch the other one? IF you would like to download the full project you can find it here, i had to comment out all the code that wasn't working my Menu class import java.awt.*; import java.awt.event.*; import java.applet.*; public class Menu extends Applet implements ActionListener{ Button bEasy,bMed,bHard; Main m; public void init(){ bEasy= new Button("Easy"); bEasy.setBounds(140,200,100,50); add(bEasy); bMed = new Button("Medium");bMed.setBounds(280,200,100,50); add(bMed); bHard= new Button("Hard");bHard.setBounds(420,200,100,50); add(bHard); setLayout(null); } public void actionPerformed(ActionEvent e){ Main m = new Main(20,10,3000,mapMed);//break; switch (e.getSource()){ case bEasy: Main m = new Main(6000,20,"levels/levelEasy.png");break;//enimies tower money world case bMed: Main m = new Main(4000,15,"levels/levelMed.png");break; case bHard: Main m = new Main(2000,10,"levels/levelEasy.png");break; default: break; } } public void paint(){ //m.draw(g) } } and here is my main class initialising code. import java.awt.*; import java.awt.event.*; import java.applet.*; import java.io.IOException; public class Main extends Applet implements Runnable, MouseListener, MouseMotionListener, ActionListener{ Button startButton, UpgRange, UpgDamage; //set up the buttons Color roadCol,startCol,finCol,selGrass,selRoad; //set up the colors Enemy e[][]; Tower t[]; Image towerpic,backpic,roadpic,levelPic; private Image i; private Graphics doubleG; //here is the world 0=grass 1=road 2=start 3=end int world[][],eStartX,eStartY; boolean drawMouse,gameEnd; static boolean start=false; static int gridLength=15; static int round=0; int Mx,My,timer=1500; static int sqrSize=31; int towers=0,towerSelected=-10; static int castleHealth=2000; String levelPath; //choose the level Easy Med or Hard int maxEnemy[] = {5,7,12,20,30,15,50,30,40,60};//number of enimies per round int maxTowers=15;//maximum number of towers allowed static int money =2000,damPrice=600,ranPrice=350,towerPrice=700; //money = the intial ammount of money you start of with //damPrice is the price to increase the damage of a tower //ranPrice is the price to increase the range of a tower public void main(int cH,int mT,int mo,int dP,int rP,int tP,String path,int[] mE)//constructor 1 castleHealth=cH; maxTowers=mT; money=mo; damPrice=dP; ranPrice=rP; towerPrice=tP; String levelPath=path; maxEnemy = mE; buildLevel(); } public void main(int cH,int mT,String path)//basic constructor castleHealth=cH; maxTowers=mT; String levelPath=path; maxEnemy = mE; buildLevel(); } public void init(){ setSize(sqrSize*15+200,sqrSize*15);//set the size of the screen roadCol = new Color(255,216,0);//set the colors for the different objects startCol = new Color(0,38,255); finCol = new Color(255,0,0); selRoad = new Color(242,204,155);//selColor is the color of something when your mouse hovers over it selGrass = new Color(0,190,0); roadpic = getImage(getDocumentBase(),"images/road.jpg"); towerpic = getImage(getDocumentBase(),"images/tower.png"); backpic = getImage(getDocumentBase(),"images/grass.jpg"); levelPic = getImage(getDocumentBase(),"images/level.jpg"); e= new Enemy[maxEnemy.length][];//activates all of the enimies for (int r=0;r<e.length;r++) e[r] = new Enemy[maxEnemy[r]]; t= new Tower[maxTowers]; for (int i=0;i<t.length;i++) t[i]= new Tower();//activates all the towers for (int i=0;i<e.length; i++)//sets all of the enimies starting co ordinates for (int j=0;j<e[i].length;j++) e[i][j] = new Enemy(eStartX,eStartY,world); initButtons();//initialise all the buttons addMouseMotionListener(this); addMouseListener(this); }

    Read the article

  • How to present a stable data model in a public API that allows internal data structures to be changed without breaking the public view of the data?

    - by Max Palmer
    I am in the process of developing an application that allows users to write C# scripts. These scripts allow users to call selected methods and to access and manipulate data in a document. This works well, however, in the development version, scripts access the document's (internal) data structures directly. This means that if we were to change the internal data model/structure, there is a good chance that someone's script will no longer compile. We obviously want to prevent this breaking change from happening, but still want to allow the user to write sensible C# code (whilst not restricting how we develop our internal data model as a result). We therefore need to decouple our scripting API and its data structures from our internal methods and data structures. We've a few ideas as to how we might allow the user to access a what is effectively a stable public version of the document's internal data*, but I wanted to throw the question out there to someone who might have some real experience of this problem. NB our internal document's data structure is quite complex and it could be quite difficult to wrap. We know we want to expose as little as possible in our public API, especially as once it's out there, it's out there for good. Can anyone help? How do scripting languages / APIs decouple their public API and data structures from their internal data structures? Is there no real alternative to having to write a complex interaction layer? If we need to do this, what's a good approach or pattern for wrapping complex data structures that include nested objects, including collections? I've looked at the API facade pattern, which looks like it's trying to address these kinds of issues, but are there alternatives? *One idea is to build a data facade that is kept stable across versions of our application. The facade exposes a set of facade data objects that are used in the script code. These maintain backwards compatibility and wrap access to our internal document's data model.

    Read the article

  • Is loose coupling w/o use cases an anti-pattern?

    - by dsimcha
    Loose coupling is, to some developers, the holy grail of well-engineered software. It's certainly a good thing when it makes code more flexible in the face of changes that are likely to occur in the foreseeable future, or avoids code duplication. On the other hand, efforts to loosely couple components increase the amount of indirection in a program, thus increasing its complexity, often making it more difficult to understand and often making it less efficient. Do you consider a focus on loose coupling without any use cases for the loose coupling (such as avoiding code duplication or planning for changes that are likely to occur in the foreseeable future) to be an anti-pattern? Can loose coupling fall under the umbrella of YAGNI?

    Read the article

  • What are other ideologies to establish relationships between distinct users besides followers/following and friends?

    - by user784637
    Websites like myspace and facebook establish relationships between distinct users using the "friending" ideology, where one user sends a request to be accepted by another user in order for them to have the mutual permission to do stuff like post messages on each others walls. Less restrictive than the "friending" ideology, Twitter and instagram use the followers/following ideology where you can subscribe to the tweets or posts of another user without their permission. Less restrictive than the "followers/following" ideology, email and calling someone on the phone allows you to directly contact anyone. Are there other ideologies that have been successfully implemented either in social networking sites or other real world constructs to establish relations between users?

    Read the article

  • The Unintended Consequences of Sound Security Policy

    - by Tanu Sood
    v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} .shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);} Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";} Author: Kevin Moulton, CISSP, CISM Meet the Author: Kevin Moulton, Senior Sales Consulting Manager, Oracle Kevin Moulton, CISSP, CISM, has been in the security space for more than 25 years, and with Oracle for 7 years. He manages the East Enterprise Security Sales Consulting Team. He is also a Distinguished Toastmaster. Follow Kevin on Twitter at twitter.com/kevin_moulton, where he sometimes tweets about security, but might also tweet about running, beer, food, baseball, football, good books, or whatever else grabs his attention. Kevin will be a regular contributor to this blog so stay tuned for more posts from him. When I speak to a room of IT administrators, I like to begin by asking them if they have implemented a complex password policy. Generally, they all nod their heads enthusiastically. I ask them if that password policy requires long passwords. More nodding. I ask if that policy requires upper and lower case letters – faster nodding – numbers – even faster – special characters – enthusiastic nodding all around! I then ask them if their policy also includes a requirement for users to regularly change their passwords. Now we have smiles with the nodding! I ask them if the users have different IDs and passwords on the many systems that they have access to. Of course! I then ask them if, when they walk around the building, they see something like this: Thanks to Jake Ludington for the nice example. Can these administrators be faulted for their policies? Probably not but, in the end, end-users will find a way to get their job done efficiently. Post-It Notes to the rescue! I was visiting a business in New York City one day which was a perfect example of this problem. First I walked up to the security desk and told them where I was headed. They asked me if they should call upstairs to have someone escort me. Is that my call? Is that policy? I said that I knew where I was going, so they let me go. Having the conference room number handy, I wandered around the place in a search of my destination. As I walked around, unescorted, I noticed the post-it note problem in abundance. Had I been so inclined, I could have logged in on almost any machine and into any number of systems. When I reached my intended conference room, I mentioned my post-it note observation to the two gentlemen with whom I was meeting. One of them said, “You mean like this,” and he produced a post it note full of login IDs and passwords from his breast pocket! I gave him kudos for not hanging the list on his monitor. We then talked for the rest of the meeting about the difficulties faced by the employees due to the security policies. These policies, although well-intended, made life very difficult for the end-users. Most users had access to 8 to 12 systems, and the passwords for each expired at a different times. The post-it note solution was understandable. Who could remember even half of them? What could this customer have done differently? I am a fan of using a provisioning system, such as Oracle Identity Manager, to manage all of the target systems. With OIM, and email could be automatically sent to all users when it was time to change their password. The end-users would follow a link to change their password on a web page, and then OIM would propagate that password out to all of the systems that the user had access to, even if the login IDs were different. Another option would be an Enterprise Single-Sign On Solution. With Oracle eSSO, all of a user’s credentials would be stored in a central, encrypted credential store. The end-user would only have to login to their machine each morning and then, as they moved to each new system, Oracle eSSO would supply the credentials. Good-bye post-it notes! 3M may be disappointed, but your end users will thank you. I hear people say that this post-it note problem is not a big deal, because the only people who would see the passwords are fellow employees. Do you really know who is walking around your building? What are the password policies in your business? How do the end-users respond?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38  | Next Page >