Search Results

Search found 27766 results on 1111 pages for 'bad idea jeans'.

Page 67/1111 | < Previous Page | 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74  | Next Page >

  • Is this a good or bad way to use constructor chaining? (... to allow for testing).

    - by panamack
    My motivation for chaining my class constructors here is so that I have a default constructor for mainstream use by my application and a second that allows me to inject a mock and a stub. It just seems a bit ugly 'new'-ing things in the ":this(...)" call and counter-intuitive calling a parametrized constructor from a default constructor , I wondered what other people would do here? (FYI - SystemWrapper) using SystemWrapper; public class MyDirectoryWorker{ // SystemWrapper interface allows for stub of sealed .Net class. private IDirectoryInfoWrap dirInf; private FileSystemWatcher watcher; public MyDirectoryWorker() : this( new DirectoryInfoWrap(new DirectoryInfo(MyDirPath)), new FileSystemWatcher()) { } public MyDirectoryWorker(IDirectoryInfoWrap dirInf, FileSystemWatcher watcher) { this.dirInf = dirInf; if(!dirInf.Exists){ dirInf.Create(); } this.watcher = watcher; watcher.Path = dirInf.FullName; watcher.NotifyFilter = NotifyFilters.FileName; watcher.Created += new FileSystemEventHandler(watcher_Created); watcher.Deleted += new FileSystemEventHandler(watcher_Deleted); watcher.Renamed += new RenamedEventHandler(watcher_Renamed); watcher.EnableRaisingEvents = true; } public static string MyDirPath{get{return Settings.Default.MyDefaultDirPath;}} // etc... }

    Read the article

  • Counting viable sublist lengths from an array.

    - by Ben B.
    This is for a genetic algorithm fitness function, so it is important I can do this as efficiently as possible, as it will be repeated over and over. Lets say there is a function foo(int[] array) that returns true if the array is a "good" array and false if the array is a "bad" array. What makes it good or bad does not matter here. Given the full array [1,6,8,9,5,11,45,16,9], lets say that subarray [1,6,8] is a "good" array and [9,5,11,45] is a "good" array. Furthermore [5,11,45,16,9] is a "good" array, and also the longest "good" subarray. Notice that while [9,5,11,45] is a "good" array, and [5,11,45,16,9] is a "good" array, [9,5,11,45,16,9] is a "bad" array. We wants the length counts of all "good" arrays, but not subarrays of "good" arrays. Furthermore, as described above, a "good" array might begin in the middle of another "good" array, but the combination of the two might be a "bad" array.

    Read the article

  • Ticket Bayesian(or something else) Categorization

    - by vinnitu
    Hi. I search solution for ticket managment system. Do you know any commercial offers? For now I have only own dev prjects with using dspam library. Maybe I am wrong use it but it show bad results. My idea was divide all prerated ticket in 2 group: spam (it is my category) and rest to (ham - all not the same with this category). After that i trained my dspam. After I redivide all tickets in new groups (for next category) and teach dspam again (with new user - by category name)... And it works bad... My thoughs about is - bad data base tickes (i mean not correct tagging before) - bad my algorythm (it is more posible) Please give me a direction to go forward. Thanks. I am integesting any idea and suggestion. Thanks again.

    Read the article

  • Bad performance function in PHP. With large files memory blows up! How can I refactor?

    - by André
    Hi I have a function that strips out lines from files. I'm handling with large files(more than 100Mb). I have the PHP Memory with 256MB but the function that handles with the strip out of lines blows up with a 100MB CSV File. What the function must do is this: Originally I have the CSV like: Copyright (c) 2007 MaxMind LLC. All Rights Reserved. locId,country,region,city,postalCode,latitude,longitude,metroCode,areaCode 1,"O1","","","",0.0000,0.0000,, 2,"AP","","","",35.0000,105.0000,, 3,"EU","","","",47.0000,8.0000,, 4,"AD","","","",42.5000,1.5000,, 5,"AE","","","",24.0000,54.0000,, 6,"AF","","","",33.0000,65.0000,, 7,"AG","","","",17.0500,-61.8000,, 8,"AI","","","",18.2500,-63.1667,, 9,"AL","","","",41.0000,20.0000,, When I pass the CSV file to this function I got: locId,country,region,city,postalCode,latitude,longitude,metroCode,areaCode 1,"O1","","","",0.0000,0.0000,, 2,"AP","","","",35.0000,105.0000,, 3,"EU","","","",47.0000,8.0000,, 4,"AD","","","",42.5000,1.5000,, 5,"AE","","","",24.0000,54.0000,, 6,"AF","","","",33.0000,65.0000,, 7,"AG","","","",17.0500,-61.8000,, 8,"AI","","","",18.2500,-63.1667,, 9,"AL","","","",41.0000,20.0000,, It only strips out the first line, nothing more. The problem is the performance of this function with large files, it blows up the memory. The function is: public function deleteLine($line_no, $csvFileName) { // this function strips a specific line from a file // if a line is stripped, functions returns True else false // // e.g. // deleteLine(-1, xyz.csv); // strip last line // deleteLine(1, xyz.csv); // strip first line // Assigna o nome do ficheiro $filename = $csvFileName; $strip_return=FALSE; $data=file($filename); $pipe=fopen($filename,'w'); $size=count($data); if($line_no==-1) $skip=$size-1; else $skip=$line_no-1; for($line=0;$line<$size;$line++) if($line!=$skip) fputs($pipe,$data[$line]); else $strip_return=TRUE; return $strip_return; } It is possible to refactor this function to not blow up with the 256MB PHP Memory? Give me some clues. Best Regards,

    Read the article

  • Finding out the windows group by virtue of which a user is able to access a database in sql server?

    - by Raghu Dodda
    There is a SQL Server 2005 database with mixed-mode authentication. Among others, we have the following logins on the server: our-domain\developers-group-1, and our-domain\developers-group-2 which are AD groups. The our-domain\developer-group-2 is added to the sysadmin role on the server, by virture of which all domain users of that group can access any database as SQL Server implictly maps the sysadmin role to the dbo user in each database. There are two users our-domain\good-user and our-domain\bad-user The issue is the following: Both the good-user and the bad-user have the exact same AD group memberships. They are both members of our-domain\developers-group-1 and our-domain\developers-group-2. The good-user is able to access all the databases, and the bad-user is not. The bad-user is able to login, but he is unable access any databases. By the way, I am the good-user. How do I go about finding out why? Here's what I tried so far: When I do print current_user, I get dbo When I do print system_user, I get my-domain\good-user When I do select * from fn_my_permissions(NULL, 'SERVER'), I see permissions. But if do execute as user='my-domain\good-user'; select * from fn_my_permissions(NULL, 'SERVER'), I dont see any permisisons. And When I do, execute as user='my-domain\bad-user'; select * from fn_my_permissions(NULL, 'SERVER'), I dont see any permisisons. Also, I was wondering if there is a sql command that will tell me, "hey! the current database user is able to access this database because he is a member such-and-such ad-group, which is a login that is mapped to such-and-such user in this database".

    Read the article

  • Much Ado About Nothing: Stub Objects

    - by user9154181
    The Solaris 11 link-editor (ld) contains support for a new type of object that we call a stub object. A stub object is a shared object, built entirely from mapfiles, that supplies the same linking interface as the real object, while containing no code or data. Stub objects cannot be executed — the runtime linker will kill any process that attempts to load one. However, you can link to a stub object as a dependency, allowing the stub to act as a proxy for the real version of the object. You may well wonder if there is a point to producing an object that contains nothing but linking interface. As it turns out, stub objects are very useful for building large bodies of code such as Solaris. In the last year, we've had considerable success in applying them to one of our oldest and thorniest build problems. In this discussion, I will describe how we came to invent these objects, and how we apply them to building Solaris. This posting explains where the idea for stub objects came from, and details our long and twisty journey from hallway idea to standard link-editor feature. I expect that these details are mainly of interest to those who work on Solaris and its makefiles, those who have done so in the past, and those who work with other similar bodies of code. A subsequent posting will omit the history and background details, and instead discuss how to build and use stub objects. If you are mainly interested in what stub objects are, and don't care about the underlying software war stories, I encourage you to skip ahead. The Long Road To Stubs This all started for me with an email discussion in May of 2008, regarding a change request that was filed in 2002, entitled: 4631488 lib/Makefile is too patient: .WAITs should be reduced This CR encapsulates a number of cronic issues with Solaris builds: We build Solaris with a parallel make (dmake) that tries to build as much of the code base in parallel as possible. There is a lot of code to build, and we've long made use of parallelized builds to get the job done quicker. This is even more important in today's world of massively multicore hardware. Solaris contains a large number of executables and shared objects. Executables depend on shared objects, and shared objects can depend on each other. Before you can build an object, you need to ensure that the objects it needs have been built. This implies a need for serialization, which is in direct opposition to the desire to build everying in parallel. To accurately build objects in the right order requires an accurate set of make rules defining the things that depend on each other. This sounds simple, but the reality is quite complex. In practice, having programmers explicitly specify these dependencies is a losing strategy: It's really hard to get right. It's really easy to get it wrong and never know it because things build anyway. Even if you get it right, it won't stay that way, because dependencies between objects can change over time, and make cannot help you detect such drifing. You won't know that you got it wrong until the builds break. That can be a long time after the change that triggered the breakage happened, making it hard to connect the cause and the effect. Usually this happens just before a release, when the pressure is on, its hard to think calmly, and there is no time for deep fixes. As a poor compromise, the libraries in core Solaris were built using a set of grossly incomplete hand written rules, supplemented with a number of dmake .WAIT directives used to group the libraries into sets of non-interacting groups that can be built in parallel because we think they don't depend on each other. From time to time, someone will suggest that we could analyze the built objects themselves to determine their dependencies and then generate make rules based on those relationships. This is possible, but but there are complications that limit the usefulness of that approach: To analyze an object, you have to build it first. This is a classic chicken and egg scenario. You could analyze the results of a previous build, but then you're not necessarily going to get accurate rules for the current code. It should be possible to build the code without having a built workspace available. The analysis will take time, and remember that we're constantly trying to make builds faster, not slower. By definition, such an approach will always be approximate, and therefore only incremantally more accurate than the hand written rules described above. The hand written rules are fast and cheap, while this idea is slow and complex, so we stayed with the hand written approach. Solaris was built that way, essentially forever, because these are genuinely difficult problems that had no easy answer. The makefiles were full of build races in which the right outcomes happened reliably for years until a new machine or a change in build server workload upset the accidental balance of things. After figuring out what had happened, you'd mutter "How did that ever work?", add another incomplete and soon to be inaccurate make dependency rule to the system, and move on. This was not a satisfying solution, as we tend to be perfectionists in the Solaris group, but we didn't have a better answer. It worked well enough, approximately. And so it went for years. We needed a different approach — a new idea to cut the Gordian Knot. In that discussion from May 2008, my fellow linker-alien Rod Evans had the initial spark that lead us to a game changing series of realizations: The link-editor is used to link objects together, but it only uses the ELF metadata in the object, consisting of symbol tables, ELF versioning sections, and similar data. Notably, it does not look at, or understand, the machine code that makes an object useful at runtime. If you had an object that only contained the ELF metadata for a dependency, but not the code or data, the link-editor would find it equally useful for linking, and would never know the difference. Call it a stub object. In the core Solaris OS, we require all objects to be built with a link-editor mapfile that describes all of its publically available functions and data. Could we build a stub object using the mapfile for the real object? It ought to be very fast to build stub objects, as there are no input objects to process. Unlike the real object, stub objects would not actually require any dependencies, and so, all of the stubs for the entire system could be built in parallel. When building the real objects, one could link against the stub objects instead of the real dependencies. This means that all the real objects can be built built in parallel too, without any serialization. We could replace a system that requires perfect makefile rules with a system that requires no ordering rules whatsoever. The results would be considerably more robust. We immediately realized that this idea had potential, but also that there were many details to sort out, lots of work to do, and that perhaps it wouldn't really pan out. As is often the case, it would be necessary to do the work and see how it turned out. Following that conversation, I set about trying to build a stub object. We determined that a faithful stub has to do the following: Present the same set of global symbols, with the same ELF versioning, as the real object. Functions are simple — it suffices to have a symbol of the right type, possibly, but not necessarily, referencing a null function in its text segment. Copy relocations make data more complicated to stub. The possibility of a copy relocation means that when you create a stub, the data symbols must have the actual size of the real data. Any error in this will go uncaught at link time, and will cause tragic failures at runtime that are very hard to diagnose. For reasons too obscure to go into here, involving tentative symbols, it is also important that the data reside in bss, or not, matching its placement in the real object. If the real object has more than one symbol pointing at the same data item, we call these aliased symbols. All data symbols in the stub object must exhibit the same aliasing as the real object. We imagined the stub library feature working as follows: A command line option to ld tells it to produce a stub rather than a real object. In this mode, only mapfiles are examined, and any object or shared libraries on the command line are are ignored. The extra information needed (function or data, size, and bss details) would be added to the mapfile. When building the real object instead of the stub, the extra information for building stubs would be validated against the resulting object to ensure that they match. In exploring these ideas, I immediately run headfirst into the reality of the original mapfile syntax, a subject that I would later write about as The Problem(s) With Solaris SVR4 Link-Editor Mapfiles. The idea of extending that poor language was a non-starter. Until a better mapfile syntax became available, which seemed unlikely in 2008, the solution could not involve extentions to the mapfile syntax. Instead, we cooked up the idea (hack) of augmenting mapfiles with stylized comments that would carry the necessary information. A typical definition might look like: # DATA(i386) __iob 0x3c0 # DATA(amd64,sparcv9) __iob 0xa00 # DATA(sparc) __iob 0x140 iob; A further problem then became clear: If we can't extend the mapfile syntax, then there's no good way to extend ld with an option to produce stub objects, and to validate them against the real objects. The idea of having ld read comments in a mapfile and parse them for content is an unacceptable hack. The entire point of comments is that they are strictly for the human reader, and explicitly ignored by the tool. Taking all of these speed bumps into account, I made a new plan: A perl script reads the mapfiles, generates some small C glue code to produce empty functions and data definitions, compiles and links the stub object from the generated glue code, and then deletes the generated glue code. Another perl script used after both objects have been built, to compare the real and stub objects, using data from elfdump, and validate that they present the same linking interface. By June 2008, I had written the above, and generated a stub object for libc. It was a useful prototype process to go through, and it allowed me to explore the ideas at a deep level. Ultimately though, the result was unsatisfactory as a basis for real product. There were so many issues: The use of stylized comments were fine for a prototype, but not close to professional enough for shipping product. The idea of having to document and support it was a large concern. The ideal solution for stub objects really does involve having the link-editor accept the same arguments used to build the real object, augmented with a single extra command line option. Any other solution, such as our prototype script, will require makefiles to be modified in deeper ways to support building stubs, and so, will raise barriers to converting existing code. A validation script that rederives what the linker knew when it built an object will always be at a disadvantage relative to the actual linker that did the work. A stub object should be identifyable as such. In the prototype, there was no tag or other metadata that would let you know that they weren't real objects. Being able to identify a stub object in this way means that the file command can tell you what it is, and that the runtime linker can refuse to try and run a program that loads one. At that point, we needed to apply this prototype to building Solaris. As you might imagine, the task of modifying all the makefiles in the core Solaris code base in order to do this is a massive task, and not something you'd enter into lightly. The quality of the prototype just wasn't good enough to justify that sort of time commitment, so I tabled the project, putting it on my list of long term things to think about, and moved on to other work. It would sit there for a couple of years. Semi-coincidentally, one of the projects I tacked after that was to create a new mapfile syntax for the Solaris link-editor. We had wanted to do something about the old mapfile syntax for many years. Others before me had done some paper designs, and a great deal of thought had already gone into the features it should, and should not have, but for various reasons things had never moved beyond the idea stage. When I joined Sun in late 2005, I got involved in reviewing those things and thinking about the problem. Now in 2008, fresh from relearning for the Nth time why the old mapfile syntax was a huge impediment to linker progress, it seemed like the right time to tackle the mapfile issue. Paving the way for proper stub object support was not the driving force behind that effort, but I certainly had them in mind as I moved forward. The new mapfile syntax, which we call version 2, integrated into Nevada build snv_135 in in February 2010: 6916788 ld version 2 mapfile syntax PSARC/2009/688 Human readable and extensible ld mapfile syntax In order to prove that the new mapfile syntax was adequate for general purpose use, I had also done an overhaul of the ON consolidation to convert all mapfiles to use the new syntax, and put checks in place that would ensure that no use of the old syntax would creep back in. That work went back into snv_144 in June 2010: 6916796 OSnet mapfiles should use version 2 link-editor syntax That was a big putback, modifying 517 files, adding 18 new files, and removing 110 old ones. I would have done this putback anyway, as the work was already done, and the benefits of human readable syntax are obvious. However, among the justifications listed in CR 6916796 was this We anticipate adding additional features to the new mapfile language that will be applicable to ON, and which will require all sharable object mapfiles to use the new syntax. I never explained what those additional features were, and no one asked. It was premature to say so, but this was a reference to stub objects. By that point, I had already put together a working prototype link-editor with the necessary support for stub objects. I was pleased to find that building stubs was indeed very fast. On my desktop system (Ultra 24), an amd64 stub for libc can can be built in a fraction of a second: % ptime ld -64 -z stub -o stubs/libc.so.1 -G -hlibc.so.1 \ -ztext -zdefs -Bdirect ... real 0.019708910 user 0.010101680 sys 0.008528431 In order to go from prototype to integrated link-editor feature, I knew that I would need to prove that stub objects were valuable. And to do that, I knew that I'd have to switch the Solaris ON consolidation to use stub objects and evaluate the outcome. And in order to do that experiment, ON would first need to be converted to version 2 mapfiles. Sub-mission accomplished. Normally when you design a new feature, you can devise reasonably small tests to show it works, and then deploy it incrementally, letting it prove its value as it goes. The entire point of stub objects however was to demonstrate that they could be successfully applied to an extremely large and complex code base, and specifically to solve the Solaris build issues detailed above. There was no way to finesse the matter — in order to move ahead, I would have to successfully use stub objects to build the entire ON consolidation and demonstrate their value. In software, the need to boil the ocean can often be a warning sign that things are trending in the wrong direction. Conversely, sometimes progress demands that you build something large and new all at once. A big win, or a big loss — sometimes all you can do is try it and see what happens. And so, I spent some time staring at ON makefiles trying to get a handle on how things work, and how they'd have to change. It's a big and messy world, full of complex interactions, unspecified dependencies, special cases, and knowledge of arcane makefile features... ...and so, I backed away, put it down for a few months and did other work... ...until the fall, when I felt like it was time to stop thinking and pondering (some would say stalling) and get on with it. Without stubs, the following gives a simplified high level view of how Solaris is built: An initially empty directory known as the proto, and referenced via the ROOT makefile macro is established to receive the files that make up the Solaris distribution. A top level setup rule creates the proto area, and performs operations needed to initialize the workspace so that the main build operations can be launched, such as copying needed header files into the proto area. Parallel builds are launched to build the kernel (usr/src/uts), libraries (usr/src/lib), and commands. The install makefile target builds each item and delivers a copy to the proto area. All libraries and executables link against the objects previously installed in the proto, implying the need to synchronize the order in which things are built. Subsequent passes run lint, and do packaging. Given this structure, the additions to use stub objects are: A new second proto area is established, known as the stub proto and referenced via the STUBROOT makefile macro. The stub proto has the same structure as the real proto, but is used to hold stub objects. All files in the real proto are delivered as part of the Solaris product. In contrast, the stub proto is used to build the product, and then thrown away. A new target is added to library Makefiles called stub. This rule builds the stub objects. The ld command is designed so that you can build a stub object using the same ld command line you'd use to build the real object, with the addition of a single -z stub option. This means that the makefile rules for building the stub objects are very similar to those used to build the real objects, and many existing makefile definitions can be shared between them. A new target is added to the Makefiles called stubinstall which delivers the stub objects built by the stub rule into the stub proto. These rules reuse much of existing plumbing used by the existing install rule. The setup rule runs stubinstall over the entire lib subtree as part of its initialization. All libraries and executables link against the objects in the stub proto rather than the main proto, and can therefore be built in parallel without any synchronization. There was no small way to try this that would yield meaningful results. I would have to take a leap of faith and edit approximately 1850 makefiles and 300 mapfiles first, trusting that it would all work out. Once the editing was done, I'd type make and see what happened. This took about 6 weeks to do, and there were many dark days when I'd question the entire project, or struggle to understand some of the many twisted and complex situations I'd uncover in the makefiles. I even found a couple of new issues that required changes to the new stub object related code I'd added to ld. With a substantial amount of encouragement and help from some key people in the Solaris group, I eventually got the editing done and stub objects for the entire workspace built. I found that my desktop system could build all the stub objects in the workspace in roughly a minute. This was great news, as it meant that use of the feature is effectively free — no one was likely to notice or care about the cost of building them. After another week of typing make, fixing whatever failed, and doing it again, I succeeded in getting a complete build! The next step was to remove all of the make rules and .WAIT statements dedicated to controlling the order in which libraries under usr/src/lib are built. This came together pretty quickly, and after a few more speed bumps, I had a workspace that built cleanly and looked like something you might actually be able to integrate someday. This was a significant milestone, but there was still much left to do. I turned to doing full nightly builds. Every type of build (open, closed, OpenSolaris, export, domestic) had to be tried. Each type failed in a new and unique way, requiring some thinking and rework. As things came together, I became aware of things that could have been done better, simpler, or cleaner, and those things also required some rethinking, the seeking of wisdom from others, and some rework. After another couple of weeks, it was in close to final form. My focus turned towards the end game and integration. This was a huge workspace, and needed to go back soon, before changes in the gate would made merging increasingly difficult. At this point, I knew that the stub objects had greatly simplified the makefile logic and uncovered a number of race conditions, some of which had been there for years. I assumed that the builds were faster too, so I did some builds intended to quantify the speedup in build time that resulted from this approach. It had never occurred to me that there might not be one. And so, I was very surprised to find that the wall clock build times for a stock ON workspace were essentially identical to the times for my stub library enabled version! This is why it is important to always measure, and not just to assume. One can tell from first principles, based on all those removed dependency rules in the library makefile, that the stub object version of ON gives dmake considerably more opportunities to overlap library construction. Some hypothesis were proposed, and shot down: Could we have disabled dmakes parallel feature? No, a quick check showed things being build in parallel. It was suggested that we might be I/O bound, and so, the threads would be mostly idle. That's a plausible explanation, but system stats didn't really support it. Plus, the timing between the stub and non-stub cases were just too suspiciously identical. Are our machines already handling as much parallelism as they are capable of, and unable to exploit these additional opportunities? Once again, we didn't see the evidence to back this up. Eventually, a more plausible and obvious reason emerged: We build the libraries and commands (usr/src/lib, usr/src/cmd) in parallel with the kernel (usr/src/uts). The kernel is the long leg in that race, and so, wall clock measurements of build time are essentially showing how long it takes to build uts. Although it would have been nice to post a huge speedup immediately, we can take solace in knowing that stub objects simplify the makefiles and reduce the possibility of race conditions. The next step in reducing build time should be to find ways to reduce or overlap the uts part of the builds. When that leg of the build becomes shorter, then the increased parallelism in the libs and commands will pay additional dividends. Until then, we'll just have to settle for simpler and more robust. And so, I integrated the link-editor support for creating stub objects into snv_153 (November 2010) with 6993877 ld should produce stub objects PSARC/2010/397 ELF Stub Objects followed by the work to convert the ON consolidation in snv_161 (February 2011) with 7009826 OSnet should use stub objects 4631488 lib/Makefile is too patient: .WAITs should be reduced This was a huge putback, with 2108 modified files, 8 new files, and 2 removed files. Due to the size, I was allowed a window after snv_160 closed in which to do the putback. It went pretty smoothly for something this big, a few more preexisting race conditions would be discovered and addressed over the next few weeks, and things have been quiet since then. Conclusions and Looking Forward Solaris has been built with stub objects since February. The fact that developers no longer specify the order in which libraries are built has been a big success, and we've eliminated an entire class of build error. That's not to say that there are no build races left in the ON makefiles, but we've taken a substantial bite out of the problem while generally simplifying and improving things. The introduction of a stub proto area has also opened some interesting new possibilities for other build improvements. As this article has become quite long, and as those uses do not involve stub objects, I will defer that discussion to a future article.

    Read the article

  • Why is IIS Anonymous authentication being used with administrative UNC drive access?

    - by Mark Lindell
    My account is local administrator on my machine. If I try to browse to a non-existent drive letter on my own box using a UNC path name: \mymachine\x$ my account would get locked out. I would also get the following warning (Event ID 100, Type “Warning”) 5 times under the “System” group in Event Viewer on my box: The server was unable to logon the Windows NT account 'ourdomain\myaccount' due to the following error: Logon failure: unknown user name or bad password. I would also get the following warning 3 times: The server was unable to logon the Windows NT account 'ourdomain\myaccount' due to the following error: The referenced account is currently locked out and may not be logged on to. On the domain controller, Event ID 680 of type “Failure Audit” would appear 4 times under the “Security” group in Event Viewer: Logon attempt by: MICROSOFT_AUTHENTICATION_PACKAGE_V1_0 Logon account: myaccount Followed by Event ID 644: User Account Locked Out: Target Account Name: myaccount Target Account ID: OURDOMAIN\myaccount Caller Machine Name: MYMACHINE Caller User Name: STAN$ Caller Domain: OURDOMAIN Caller Logon ID: (0x0,0x3E7) Followed by another 4 errors having Event ID 680. Strangely, every time I tried to browse to the UNC path I would be prompted for a user name and password, the above errors would be written to the log, and my account would be locked out. When I hit “Cancel” in response to the user name/password prompt, the following message box would display: Windows cannot find \mymachine\x$. Check the spelling and try again, or try searching for the item by clicking the Start button and then clicking Search. I checked with others in the group using XP and they only got the above message box when browsing to a “bad” drive letter on their box. No one else was prompted for a user name/password and then locked out. So, every time I tried to browse to the “bad” drive letter, behind the scenes XP was trying to login 8 times using bad credentials (or, at least a bad password as the login was correct), causing my account to get locked out on the 4th try. Interestingly, If I tried browsing to a “good” drive such as “c$” it would work fine. As a test, I tried logging on to my box as a different login and browsing the “bad” UNC path. Strangely, my “ourdomain\myaccount” account was getting locked out – not the one I was logged in as! I was totally confused as to why the credentials for the other login were being passed. After much Googling, I found a link referring to some IIS settings I was vaguely familiar with from the past but could not see how they would affect this issue. It was related to the IIS directory security setting “Anonymous access and authentication control” located under: Control Panel/Administrative Tools/Computer Management/Services and Applications/Internet Information Services/Web Sites/Default Web Site/Properties/Directory Security/Anonymous access and authentication control/Edit/Password I found no indication while scouring the Internet that this property was related to my UNC problem. But, I did notice that this property was set to my domain user name and password. And, my password did age recently but I had not reset the password accordingly for this property. Sure enough, keying in the new password corrected the problem. I was no longer prompted for a user name/password when browsing the UNC path and the account lock-outs ceased. Now, a couple of questions: Why would an IIS setting affect the browsing of a UNC path on a local box? Why had I not encountered this problem before? My password has aged several times and I’ve never encountered this problem. And, I can’t remember the last time I updated the “Anonymous access” IIS password it’s been so long. I’ve run the script after a password reset before and never had my account locked-out due to the UNC problem (the script accesses UNC paths as a normal part of its processing). Windows Update did install “Cumulative Security Update for Internet Explorer 7 for Windows XP (KB972260)” on my box on 7/29/2009. I wonder if this is responsible.

    Read the article

  • The Disloyalty Card

    - by David Dorf
    Let's take a break from technology for a second; please indulge me. (That's for you Erick.) A few months back, James Hoffmann reported that Gwilym Davies, the 2009 World Barista Champion, had implemented a rather unique idea for his cafe: the disloyalty card. His card lists eight nearby cafes in London that the cardholder must visit and try a coffee. After sampling all eight and collecting the required stamps, Gwilym provides a free coffee from his shop. His idea sends customers to his competitors. What does this say about Gwilym? First, it tells me he's confident in his abilities to make a mean cup of java. Second, it tells me he's truly passionate about his his trade. But was this a sound business endeavor? Obviously the risk is that one of his loyal customers might just find a better product at a competitor and not return. But the goal isn't really to strengthen his customer base -- its to strengthen the market, which will in turn provide more customers over the long run. This idea seems great for frequently purchased products like restaurants, bars, bakeries, music, and of course, cafes. Its probably not a good idea for high priced merchandise or infrequently purchased items like shoes, electronics, and housewares. Nevertheless, its a great example of thinking in reverse. Try this: Instead of telling your staff how you want customers treated, list out the ways you don't want customers treated. Why should you limit people's imagination and freedom to engage customers? Instead, give them guidelines to avoid the bad behavior, and leave them open to be creative with the positive behavior. Instead of asking the question, "how can we get more people in our stores?" try asking the inverse: "why aren't people visiting our stores?" Innovation doesn't only come from asking "why?" Often it comes from asking "why not?"

    Read the article

  • Building KPIs to monitor your business Its not really about the Technology

    When I have discussions with people about Business Intelligence, one of the questions the inevitably come up is about building KPIs and how to accomplish that. From a technical level the concept of a KPI is very simple, almost too simple in that it is like the tip of an iceberg floating above the water. The key to that iceberg is not really the tip, but the mass of the iceberg that is hidden beneath the surface upon which the tip sits. The analogy of the iceberg is not meant to indicate that the foundation of the KPI is overly difficult or complex. The disparity in size in meant to indicate that the larger thing that needs to be defined is not the technical tip, but the underlying business definition of what the KPI means. From a technical perspective the KPI consists of primarily the following items: Actual Value This is the actual value data point that is being measured. An example would be something like the amount of sales. Target Value This is the target goal for the KPI. This is a number that can be measured against Actual Value. An example would be $10,000 in monthly sales. Target Indicator Range This is the definition of ranges that define what type of indicator the user will see comparing the Actual Value to the Target Value. Most often this is defined by stoplight, but can be any indicator that is going to show a status in a quick fashion to the user. Typically this would be something like: Red Light = Actual Value more than 5% below target; Yellow Light = Within 5% of target either direction; Green Light = More than 5% higher than Target Value Status\Trend Indicator This is an optional attribute of a KPI that is typically used to show some kind of trend. The vast majority of these indicators are used to show some type of progress against a previous period. As an example, the status indicator might be used to show how the monthly sales compare to last month. With this type of indicator there needs to be not only a definition of what the ranges are for your status indictor, but then also what value the number needs to be compared against. So now we have an idea of what data points a KPI consists of from a technical perspective lets talk a bit about tools. As you can see technically there is not a whole lot to them and the choice of technology is not as important as the definition of the KPIs, which we will get to in a minute. There are many different types of tools in the Microsoft BI stack that you can use to expose your KPI to the business. These include Performance Point, SharePoint, Excel, and SQL Reporting Services. There are pluses and minuses to each technology and the right technology is based a lot on your goals and how you want to deliver the information to the users. Additionally, there are other non-Microsoft tools that can be used to expose KPI indicators to your business users. Regardless of the technology used as your front end, the heavy lifting of KPI is in the business definition of the values and benchmarks for that KPI. The discussion about KPIs is very dependent on the history of an organization and how much they are exposed to the attributes of a KPI. Often times when discussing KPIs with a business contact who has not been exposed to KPIs the discussion tends to also be a session educating the business user about what a KPI is and what goes into the definition of a KPI. The majority of times the business user has an idea of what their actual values are and they have been tracking those numbers for some time, generally in Excel and all manually. So they will know the amount of sales last month along with sales two years ago in the same month. Where the conversation tends to get stuck is when you start discussing what the target value should be. The actual value is answering the What and How much questions. When you are talking about the Target values you are asking the question Is this number good or bad. Typically, the user will know whether or not the value is good or bad, but most of the time they are not able to quantify what is good or bad. Their response is usually something like I just know. Because they have been watching the sales quantity for years now, they can tell you that a 5% decrease in sales this month might actually be a good thing, maybe because the salespeople are all waiting until next month when the new versions come out. It can sometimes be very hard to break the business people of this habit. One of the fears generally is that the status indicator is not subjective. Thus, in the scenario above, the business user is going to be fearful that their boss, just looking at a negative red indicator, is going to haul them out to the woodshed for a bad month. But, on the flip side, if all you are displaying is the amount of sales, only a person with knowledge of last month sales and the target amount for this month would have any idea if $10,000 in sales is good or not. Here is where a key point about KPIs needs to be communicated to both the business user and any user who might be viewing the results of that KPI. The KPI is just one tool that is used to report on business performance. The KPI is meant as a quick indicator of one business statistic. It is not meant to tell the entire story. It does not answer the question Why. Its primary purpose is to objectively and quickly expose an area of the business that might warrant more review. There is always going to be the need to do further analysis on any potential negative or neutral KPI. So, hopefully, once you have convinced your business user to come up with some target numbers and ranges for status indicators, you then need to take the next step and help them answer the Why question. The main question here to ask is, Okay, you see the indicator and you need to discover why the number is what is, where do you go?. The answer is usually a combination of sources. A sales manager might have some of the following items at their disposal (Marketing report showing a decrease in the promotional discounts for the month, Pricing Report showing the reduction of prices of older models, an Inventory Report showing the discontinuation of a particular product line, or a memo showing the ending of a large affiliate partnership. The answers to the question Why are never as simple as a single indicator value. Bring able to quickly get to this information is all about designing how a user accesses the KPIs and then also how easily they can get to the additional information they need. This is where a Dashboard mentality can come in handy. For example, the business user can have a dashboard that shows their KPIs, but also has links to some of the common reports that they run regarding Sales Data. The users boss may have the same KPIs on their dashboard, but instead of links to individual reports they are going to have a link to a status report that was created by the user that pulls together all the data about the KPI in a summary format the users boss can review. So some of the key things to think about when building or evaluating KPIs for your organization: Technology should not be the driving factor KPIs are of little value without some indicator for whether a value is good, bad or neutral. KPIs only give an answer to the Is this number good\bad? question Make sure the ability to drill into the Why of a KPI is close at hand and relevant to the user who is viewing the KPI. The KPI is a key business tool when defined properly to help monitor business performance across the enterprise in an objective and consistent manner. At times it might feel like the process of defining the business aspects of a KPI can sometimes be arduous, the payoff in the end can far outweigh the costs. Some of the benefits of going through this process are a better understanding of the key metrics for an organization and the measure of those metrics and a consistent snapshot of business performance that can be utilized across the organization. And I think that these are benefits to any organization regardless of the technology or the implementation.Did you know that DotNetSlackers also publishes .net articles written by top known .net Authors? We already have over 80 articles in several categories including Silverlight. Take a look: here.

    Read the article

  • A Good Developer is So Hard to Find

    - by James Michael Hare
    Let me start out by saying I want to damn the writers of the Toughest Developer Puzzle Ever – 2. It is eating every last shred of my free time! But as I've been churning through each puzzle and marvelling at the brain teasers and trivia within, I began to think about interviewing developers and why it seems to be so hard to find good ones.  The problem is, it seems like no matter how hard we try to find the perfect way to separate the chaff from the wheat, inevitably someone will get hired who falls far short of expectations or someone will get passed over for missing a piece of trivia or a tricky brain teaser that could have been an excellent team member.   In shops that are primarily software-producing businesses or other heavily IT-oriented businesses (Microsoft, Amazon, etc) there often exists a much tighter bond between HR and the hiring development staff because development is their life-blood. Unfortunately, many of us work in places where IT is viewed as a cost or just a means to an end. In these shops, too often, HR and development staff may work against each other due to differences in opinion as to what a good developer is or what one is worth.  It seems that if you ask two different people what makes a good developer, often you will get three different opinions.   With the exception of those shops that are purely development-centric (you guys have it much easier!), most other shops have management who have very little knowledge about the development process.  Their view can often be that development is simply a skill that one learns and then once aquired, that developer can produce widgets as good as the next like workers on an assembly-line floor.  On the other side, you have many developers that feel that software development is an art unto itself and that the ability to create the most pure design or know the most obscure of keywords or write the shortest-possible obfuscated piece of code is a good coder.  So is it a skill?  An Art?  Or something entirely in between?   Saying that software is merely a skill and one just needs to learn the syntax and tools would be akin to saying anyone who knows English and can use Word can write a 300 page book that is accurate, meaningful, and stays true to the point.  This just isn't so.  It takes more than mere skill to take words and form a sentence, join those sentences into paragraphs, and those paragraphs into a document.  I've interviewed candidates who could answer obscure syntax and keyword questions and once they were hired could not code effectively at all.  So development must be more than a skill.   But on the other end, we have art.  Is development an art?  Is our end result to produce art?  I can marvel at a piece of code -- see it as concise and beautiful -- and yet that code most perform some stated function with accuracy and efficiency and maintainability.  None of these three things have anything to do with art, per se.  Art is beauty for its own sake and is a wonderful thing.  But if you apply that same though to development it just doesn't hold.  I've had developers tell me that all that matters is the end result and how you code it is entirely part of the art and I couldn't disagree more.  Yes, the end result, the accuracy, is the prime criteria to be met.  But if code is not maintainable and efficient, it would be just as useless as a beautiful car that breaks down once a week or that gets 2 miles to the gallon.  Yes, it may work in that it moves you from point A to point B and is pretty as hell, but if it can't be maintained or is not efficient, it's not a good solution.  So development must be something less than art.   In the end, I think I feel like development is a matter of craftsmanship.  We use our tools and we use our skills and set about to construct something that satisfies a purpose and yet is also elegant and efficient.  There is skill involved, and there is an art, but really it boils down to being able to craft code.  Crafting code is far more than writing code.  Anyone can write code if they know the syntax, but so few people can actually craft code that solves a purpose and craft it well.  So this is what I want to find, I want to find code craftsman!  But how?   I used to ask coding-trivia questions a long time ago and many people still fall back on this.  The thought is that if you ask the candidate some piece of coding trivia and they know the answer it must follow that they can craft good code.  For example:   What C++ keyword can be applied to a class/struct field to allow it to be changed even from a const-instance of that class/struct?  (answer: mutable)   So what do we prove if a candidate can answer this?  Only that they know what mutable means.  One would hope that this would infer that they'd know how to use it, and more importantly when and if it should ever be used!  But it rarely does!  The problem with triva questions is that you will either: Approve a really good developer who knows what some obscure keyword is (good) Reject a really good developer who never needed to use that keyword or is too inexperienced to know how to use it (bad) Approve a really bad developer who googled "C++ Interview Questions" and studied like hell but can't craft (very bad) Many HR departments love these kind of tests because they are short and easy to defend if a legal issue arrises on hiring decisions.  After all it's easy to say a person wasn't hired because they scored 30 out of 100 on some trivia test.  But unfortunately, you've eliminated a large part of your potential developer pool and possibly hired a few duds.  There are times I've hired candidates who knew every trivia question I could throw out them and couldn't craft.  And then there are times I've interviewed candidates who failed all my trivia but who I took a chance on who were my best finds ever.    So if not trivia, then what?  Brain teasers?  The thought is, these type of questions measure the thinking power of a candidate.  The problem is, once again, you will either: Approve a good candidate who has never heard the problem and can solve it (good) Reject a good candidate who just happens not to see the "catch" because they're nervous or it may be really obscure (bad) Approve a candidate who has studied enough interview brain teasers (once again, you can google em) to recognize the "catch" or knows the answer already (bad). Once again, you're eliminating good candidates and possibly accepting bad candidates.  In these cases, I think testing someone with brain teasers only tests their ability to answer brain teasers, not the ability to craft code. So how do we measure someone's ability to craft code?  Here's a novel idea: have them code!  Give them a computer and a compiler, or a whiteboard and a pen, or paper and pencil and have them construct a piece of code.  It just makes sense that if we're going to hire someone to code we should actually watch them code.  When they're done, we can judge them on several criteria: Correctness - does the candidate's solution accurately solve the problem proposed? Accuracy - is the candidate's solution reasonably syntactically correct? Efficiency - did the candidate write or use the more efficient data structures or algorithms for the job? Maintainability - was the candidate's code free of obfuscation and clever tricks that diminish readability? Persona - are they eager and willing or aloof and egotistical?  Will they work well within your team? It may sound simple, or it may sound crazy, but when I'm looking to hire a developer, I want to see them actually develop well-crafted code.

    Read the article

  • SQL Server MCM is too easy, is it?

    - by simonsabin
    We all know that Brent Ozar did the MCM training/certification over the past few weeks. He wrote an interesting article on Friday about the bad bits ( http://www.brentozar.com/archive/2010/04/sql-mcm-now-bad-stuff/ ) of the training and it lead me to thinking about the certification process again(I often think about it, and it appears often in response to something from Brent http://sqlblogcasts.com/blogs/simons/archive/2010/02/12/Whats-missing-in-the-SQL-Certification-process-.aspx ) This time what...(read more)

    Read the article

  • How to mount ext4 partition?

    - by Flint
    How do I mount an ext4 partition as my user account so I wouldn't require root access to r/w on it? I used -o uid=flint,gid=flint on the mount command but I keep getting mount: wrong fs type, bad option, bad superblock on /dev/sda7, missing codepage or helper program, or other error In some cases useful info is found in syslog - try dmesg | tail or so Another thing, I want avoid using udisks for now as it doesn't let me mount to my specified mount point name.

    Read the article

  • Was I wrong about JavaScript?

    - by jboyer
    Yes, I was. Recently, I’ve taken a good hard look at JavaScript. I’ve used it before but mostly in the capacity of web design. Using JQuery to make your web page do cool stuff is different than really creating a JavaScript application using all of the language constructs. What I’m finding as I use it more is that I may have been wrong about my assumptions about it. Let me explain.   I enjoyed doing cool stuff with JQuery but the limited experience with JavaScript as a language coupled with the bad things that I heard about it led me to not have any real interest in it. However, JavaScript is ubiquitous on the web and if I want to do any web development, which I do, I need to learn it. So here I am, diving deep into the language with the help of the JavaScript Fundamentals training course at Pluralsight (great training for a low price) and the JavaScript: The Good Parts book by Douglas Crockford.   Now, there are certainly parts of JavaScript that are bad. I think these are well known by any developer that uses it. The parts that I feel are especially egregious are the following: The global object null vs. undefined truthy and falsy limited (nearly nonexistent) scoping ‘==’ and ‘===’ (I just don’t get the reason for coercion)   However, what I am finding hiding under the covers of the bad things is a good language. I am finding that I am legitimately enjoying JavaScript. This I was not expecting. I’m not going to go into a huge dissertation on what I like about it, but some things include: Object literal notation dynamic typing functional style (JavaScript: The Good Parts describes it as LISP in C clothing) JSON (better than XML) There are parts of JavaScript that seem strange to OOP developers like myself. However, just because it is different or seems strange does not mean it is bad. Some differences are quite interesting and useful.   I feel that it is important for developers to challenge their assumptions and also to be able to admit when they are wrong on a topic. Many different situations can arise that lead to this, such as choosing the wrong technology for a problem’s solution, misunderstanding the requirements, etc. I decided to challenge my assumptions about JavaScript instead of moving straight into CoffeeScript or Dart. After exploring it, I find that I am beginning to enjoy it the more I use it. As long as there are those like Crockford to help guide me in the right way to code in JavaScript, I can create elegant and efficient solutions to problems and add another ‘arrow’ to the ‘quiver’, so to speak. I do still intend to learn CoffeeScript to see what the hub-bub is about, but now I no longer have to be afraid of JavaScript as a legitimate programming language.   Has something similar ever happened to you? Tell me about it in the comments below.

    Read the article

  • Drupal 7: One-time user account

    - by Noob
    I'm going to create a survey in Drupal 7 with the webform module, installed on a debian system which may be adapted in every way. The users (personally known, approx. 120) doing that survey will walk into a room and complete the survey in browsers on different computers. After that, they'll leave the room and other persons will enter, complete the survey on the same computers and so on. Each user may enter only one submission. The process needs to be anonymous, i. e. I mustn't have any idea of who did wich submission. My current solution is to generate random one-time-passwords and hand out one password per user (without noting who got which password). Within the survey there will be a password field where the one-time-password is entered. The value is checked by webform to be unique. I'll get the data via csv or Excel and verify the passwords manually in excel by comparing them to the list of valid passwords. The problem is: I don't like the idea of manually generating the password list, copying it to excel and doing a manual check. That's a good idea for one-time-use, but we're going to repeat the survey every once in a while. I'd rather generate one-time-logins (like user0001/fdlkjewf, user0002/dfrefnnr, ...) for each survey, hand them out to the users and let drupal/debian/whatever check whether a submission is valid or not. Do you have any idea how to batch-generate about 120 users with one-time-passwords in Drupal 7 and verify that each user may submit the form only once? Do you even have a better idea how to accomplish the task within the intranet? Thank you for your help.

    Read the article

  • The cost of Programmer Team Clustering

    - by MarkPearl
    I recently was involved in a conversation about the productivity of programmers and the seemingly wide range in abilities that different programmers have in this industry. Some of the comments made were reiterated a few days later when I came across a chapter in Code Complete (v2) where it says "In programming specifically, many studies have shown order-of-magnitude differences in the quality of the programs written, the sizes of the programs written, and the productivity of programmers". In line with this is another comment presented by Code Complete when discussing teams - "Good programmers tend to cluster, as do bad programmers". This is something I can personally relate to. I have come across some really good and bad programmers and 99% of the time it turns out the team they work in is the same - really good or really bad. When I have found a mismatch, it hasn't stayed that way for long - the person has moved on, or the team has ejected the individual. Keeping this in mind I would like to comment on the risks an organization faces when forcing teams to remain together regardless of the mix. When you have the situation where someone is not willing to be part of the team but still wants to get a pay check at the end of each month, it presents some interesting challenges and hard decisions to make. First of all, when this occurs you need to give them an opportunity to change - for someone to change, they need to know what the problem is and what is expected. It is unreasonable to expect someone to change but have not indicated what they need to change and the consequences of not changing. If after a reasonable time of an individual being aware of the problem and not making an effort to improve you need to do two things... Follow through with the consequences of not changing. Consider the impact that this behaviour will have on the rest of the team. What is the cost of not following through with the consequences? If there is no follow through, it is often an indication to the individual that they can continue their behaviour. Why should they change if you don't care enough to keep your end of the agreement? In many ways I think it is very similar to the "Broken Windows" principles – if you allow the windows to break and don’t fix them, more will get broken. What is the cost of keeping them on? When keeping a disruptive influence in a team you risk loosing the good in the team. As Code Complete says, good and bad programmers tend to cluster - they have a tendency to keep this balance - if you are not going to help keep the balance they will. The cost of not removing a disruptive influence is that the good in the team will eventually help you maintain the clustering themselves by leaving.

    Read the article

  • WebCenter Customer Spotlight: Sberbank of Russia

    - by me
    Author: Peter Reiser - Social Business Evangelist, Oracle WebCenter  Solution SummarySberbank of Russia is the largest credit institution in Russia and the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS), accounting for 27% of Russian banking assets and 26% of Russian banking capital.Sberbank of Russia needed to increase business efficiency and employee productivity due to the growth in its corporate clientele from 1.2 million to an estimated 1.6 million.Sberbank of Russia deployed Oracle’s Siebel Customer Relationship Management (CRM) applications to create a single client view, optimize client communication, improve efficiency, and automate distressed asset processing. Based on Oracle WebCenter Content, they implemented an enterprise content management system for documents, unstructured content storage and search, which became an indispensable service across the organization and in the board room business results. Sberbank of Russia consolidated borrower information across the entire organization into a single repository to obtain, for the first time, a single view on the bank’s borrowers. With the implemented solution they reducing the amount of bad debt significantly. Company OverviewSberbank of Russia is the largest credit institution in Russia and the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS), accounting for 27% of Russian banking assets and 26% of Russian banking capital. In 2010, it ranked 43rd in the world for Tier 1 capital. Business ChallengesSberbank of Russia needed to increase business efficiency and employee productivity due to the growth in its corporate clientele from 1.2 million to an estimated 1.6 million. It also wanted to automate distressed asset management to reduce the number of corporate clients’ bad debts. As part of their business strategy they wanted to drive high-quality, competitive customer services by simplifying client communication processes and enabling personnel to quickly access client information Solution deployedSberbank of Russia deployed Oracle’s Siebel Customer Relationship Management (CRM) applications to create a single client view, optimize client communication, improve efficiency, and automate distressed asset processing. Based on Oracle WebCenter Content, they implemented an enterprise content management system for documents, unstructured content storage and search which became an indispensable service across the organization and in the board room business results. Business ResultsSberbank of Russia consolidated borrower information across the entire organization into a single repository to obtain, for the first time, a single view on the bank’s borrowers. They monitored 103,000 client transactions and 32,000 bank cards with credit collection issues (100% of Sberbank’s bad borrowers) reducing the amount of bad debt significantly. “Innovation and client service are the foundation of our business strategy. Oracle’s Siebel CRM applications helped advance our objectives by enabling us to deliver faster, more personalized service while managing and tracking distressed assets.” A.B. Sokolov, Head of Center of Business Administration and Customer Relationship Management, Sberbank of Russia Additional Information Sberbank of Russia Customer Snapshot Oracle WebCenter Content Siebel Customer Relationship Management 8.1 Oracle Business Intelligence, Enterprise Edition 11g

    Read the article

  • Patenting a Web Application before launch?

    - by SoreThumb
    While discussing a website idea I had with friends and worked on it, they told me to be wary of theft regarding the website. Since the code I'd be working on would be mostly Javascript and HTML, the likelihood of theft is quite high. Furthermore, if I'm lucky, the idea I have would be a breakthrough when it comes to being useful. So, you can see the problem here-- I would be developing an application that's easily stolen, and unfortunately an application that companies larger than myself would want to provide. I'm also unsure if this idea has already been patented. I realize patent law is murky as in you can create a vague patent and still claim others are violating it. So, I'd like to search existing patents for one that may be relevant to my idea, and I'd like to patent it in the meantime. Does anyone have any experience regarding this? Should I invite a lawyer into the mix? As a note, I was going to add tags like, "Patents", but nobody has asked such a question yet and I just joined this StackOverflow...

    Read the article

  • Good SEO - Why is Good SEO Better Than Its Evil 'Black Hat' Brother?

    With the rise of today's technology, a number of bad and dodgy practices have come into play that can seriously put your website at risk from being banned in the search engines - no questions asked. The constant shift of techniques and 'state of flux' the search engines remain in makes it difficult to differentiate between good and bad SEO.

    Read the article

  • Circular class dependency

    - by shad0w
    Is it bad design to have 2 classes which need each other? I'm writing a small game in which I have a GameEngine class which has got a few GameState objects. To access several rendering methods, these GameState objects also need to know the GameEngine class - so it's a circular dependency. Would you call this bad design? I am just asking, because I am not quite sure and at this time I am still able to refactor these things.

    Read the article

  • Hardware problem

    - by Ajay0990
    Guys I need help to recover my external hard disk. Im using SEGATE FREEAGENT GO 320gb HDD. Recently I tried to format it using command line in win7, but accidentally I removed the hdd before the format is complete and I cannot open it and I tried to recover data using as many software's as I can but no use I have max of 25000 bad sectors. Can i still recover my hdd? Is there any way to recover my HDD with max bad sectors using Linux?

    Read the article

  • Subversion gives Error 500 until authenticating with a web browser

    - by Farseeker
    We used to use Collabnet SVN/Apache combo on a Windows server with LDAP authentication, and whilst the performance wasn't brilliant it used to work perfectly. After switching to a fresh Ubuntu 10 install, and setting up an Apache/SVN/LDAP configuration, we have HTTPS access to our repositories, using Active Directory authentication via LDAP. We're now having a very peculiar issue. Whenever a new user accesses a repository, our SVN clients (we have a few depending on the tool, but for arguments sake, let's stick to Tortoise SVN) report "Error 500 - Unknown Response". To get around this, we have to log into the repo using a web browser and navigate 'backwards' until it works E.G: SVN Checkout https://svn.example.local/SVN/MyRepo/MyModule/ - Error 500 (bad) Webbrowse to https://svn.example.local/SVN/MyRepo/MyModule/ - Error 500 (bad) Webbrowse to https://svn.example.local/SVN/MyRepo/ - Error 500 (bad) Webbrowse to https://svn.example.local/SVN/ - Forbidden 403 (correct) Webbrowse to https://svn.example.local/SVN/MyRepo/ - OK 200 (correct) SVN Checkout https://svn.example.local/SVN/MyRepo/MyModule/ - Error 500 (bad) Webbrowse to https://svn.example.local/SVN/MyRepo/MyModule/ - OK 200 (correct) SVN Checkout https://svn.example.local/SVN/MyRepo/MyModule/ - OK 200 (correct) It seems to require authentication up the tree, starting from the svnparentpath up through to the module required. Has anyone seen anything like this before? Any ideas on where to start before I ditch it back to Collabnet's SVN server?

    Read the article

  • LSI MegaRAID LINUX got Optimal after degradation but strange POST message

    - by kesrut
    Linux server box with LSI MegaRAID controller got degraded. But after some time RAID status changed to Optimal. Adapter 0 -- Virtual Drive Information: Virtual Drive: 0 (Target Id: 0) Name : RAID Level : Primary-1, Secondary-0, RAID Level Qualifier-0 Size : 2.727 TB Mirror Data : 2.727 TB State : Optimal Strip Size : 256 KB Number Of Drives per span:2 Span Depth : 3 Default Cache Policy: WriteBack, ReadAdaptive, Cached, No Write Cache if Bad BBU Current Cache Policy: WriteThrough, ReadAdaptive, Cached, No Write Cache if Bad BBU Default Access Policy: Read/Write Current Access Policy: Read/Write Disk Cache Policy : Disk's Default Encryption Type : None Is VD Cached: No But now I'm getting RAID BIOS POST message: Your battery is either charging, bad or missing, and you have VDs configured for write-back mode. Because the battery is not currently usable, these VDs willl actually run in write-through mode until the battery is fully charged or replaced if it is bad or missing. (Image: http://cl.ly/image/1h1O093b1i2d) So may it be battery issue caused problem ? I get information about battery: BatteryType: iBBU Voltage: 4001 mV Current: 0 mA Temperature: 22 C Battery State : Operational BBU Firmware Status: Charging Status : None Voltage : OK Temperature : OK Learn Cycle Requested : No Learn Cycle Active : No Learn Cycle Status : OK Learn Cycle Timeout : No I2c Errors Detected : No Battery Pack Missing : No Battery Replacement required : No Remaining Capacity Low : No Periodic Learn Required : No Transparent Learn : No No space to cache offload : No Pack is about to fail & should be replaced : No Cache Offload premium feature required : No Module microcode update required : No Where can be problem ? I'm disabled alarms, but get them if enabled. But don't know how find root of problem.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74  | Next Page >