On Fri, 16 May 2008 14:06:43 -0700, The Ghost In The Machine wrote:

> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Ivan Marsh
> <ivanmarsh******.com>
> wrote
> on Fri, 16 May 2008 13:53:47 -0500
> <pan.2008.05.16.18.53.46.486748******.com>:
>> On Fri, 16 May 2008 14:44:09 -0400, Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 16 May 2008 13:37:30 -0500, Ivan Marsh wrote:
>>>
>>>> *This should in no way be misconstrued as an endorsement of windows. I
>>>> would not knowingly trust my life to a Microsoft OS.*
>>>
>>> Ever been in a hospital?
>>> If so ,you already have.
>>>
>>> Ever go to the doctor?
>>> If so, you already have.
>>>
>>> Ever go to the dentist?
>>> If so you already have.
>>>
>>> Ever go to the pharmacy to get medications? If so you already have.
>>>
>>> ....and so forth..
>>
>> I said I didn't WANT to know.
>>
>
> Well, FWIW my dentist also uses Windows to keep track
> of appointments. AFAIK the drilling equipment and such
> is not computer-controlled. I wouldn't worry
> unnecessarily.

Patient records getting mixed up, lost etc.
It doesn't have to be a direct failure, like say the Xray machine
controlled by Windows goes nuts.
It can be secondary and certainly *can* put your health at risk.


--
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

On Fri, 16 May 2008 14:06:43 -0700, The Ghost In The Machine wrote:

> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Ivan Marsh <ivanmarsh******.com>
> wrote
> on Fri, 16 May 2008 13:53:47 -0500
> <pan.2008.05.16.18.53.46.486748******.com>:
>> On Fri, 16 May 2008 14:44:09 -0400, Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 16 May 2008 13:37:30 -0500, Ivan Marsh wrote:
>>>
>>>> *This should in no way be misconstrued as an endorsement of windows.
>>>> I would not knowingly trust my life to a Microsoft OS.*
>>>
>>> Ever been in a hospital?
>>> If so ,you already have.
>>>
>>> Ever go to the doctor?
>>> If so, you already have.
>>>
>>> Ever go to the dentist?
>>> If so you already have.
>>>
>>> Ever go to the pharmacy to get medications? If so you already have.
>>>
>>> ....and so forth..
>>
>> I said I didn't WANT to know.
>>
>>
> Well, FWIW my dentist also uses Windows to keep track of appointments.
> AFAIK the drilling equipment and such is not computer-controlled. I
> wouldn't worry unnecessarily.
>
> Bear also in mind that Java's EULA has the following clause:
>
> 3. RESTRICTIONS. [...] You acknowledge that Licensed Software is not
> designed or intended for use in the design, construction, operation or
> maintenance of any nuclear facility. Sun Microsystems, Inc. disclaims
> any express or implied warranty of fitness for such uses. [...]
>
> (Personally, I'm not sure *any* language is explicitly intended for use
> in the design of nuclear facilities -- or anything else, really. It's a
> strange inclusion, though.)

It's not that strange.

Microsoft's license indemnifies them from any catastrophic failure of
their software.

It's sad that part of any software license pretty much says "Do not use
this software to do anything important."

At least Java went to Mars.

--
"Remain calm, we're here to protect you!"

On Fri, 16 May 2008 17:57:01 -0400, Moshe Goldfarb wrote:

> On Fri, 16 May 2008 16:47:58 -0500, Ivan Marsh wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 16 May 2008 14:06:43 -0700, The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
>>
>>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Ivan Marsh <ivanmarsh******.com>
>>> wrote
>>> on Fri, 16 May 2008 13:53:47 -0500
>>> <pan.2008.05.16.18.53.46.486748******.com>:
>>>> On Fri, 16 May 2008 14:44:09 -0400, Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, 16 May 2008 13:37:30 -0500, Ivan Marsh wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> *This should in no way be misconstrued as an endorsement of
>>>>>> windows. I would not knowingly trust my life to a Microsoft OS.*
>>>>>
>>>>> Ever been in a hospital?
>>>>> If so ,you already have.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ever go to the doctor?
>>>>> If so, you already have.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ever go to the dentist?
>>>>> If so you already have.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ever go to the pharmacy to get medications? If so you already have.
>>>>>
>>>>> ....and so forth..
>>>>
>>>> I said I didn't WANT to know.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Well, FWIW my dentist also uses Windows to keep track of appointments.
>>> AFAIK the drilling equipment and such is not computer-controlled. I
>>> wouldn't worry unnecessarily.
>>>
>>> Bear also in mind that Java's EULA has the following clause:
>>>
>>> 3. RESTRICTIONS. [...] You acknowledge that Licensed Software is not
>>> designed or intended for use in the design, construction, operation or
>>> maintenance of any nuclear facility. Sun Microsystems, Inc. disclaims
>>> any express or implied warranty of fitness for such uses. [...]
>>>
>>> (Personally, I'm not sure *any* language is explicitly intended for
>>> use in the design of nuclear facilities -- or anything else, really.
>>> It's a strange inclusion, though.)
>>
>> It's not that strange.
>>
>> Microsoft's license indemnifies them from any catastrophic failure of
>> their software.
>>
>> It's sad that part of any software license pretty much says "Do not use
>> this software to do anything important."
>>
>> At least Java went to Mars.
>
> Was Java running the innards of that 40 million dollar Tonka Toy that
> went brain dead on Mars 10 minutes after it landed?

Suggesting that hitting Mars much less landing safely on the surface is
trivial?

I don't know which systems Java was used in exactly... I just know it was
along for the ride.

--
"Remain calm, we're here to protect you!"

On Fri, 16 May 2008 17:00:21 -0500, Ivan Marsh wrote:

> On Fri, 16 May 2008 17:57:01 -0400, Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 16 May 2008 16:47:58 -0500, Ivan Marsh wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 16 May 2008 14:06:43 -0700, The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
>>>
>>>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Ivan Marsh <ivanmarsh******.com>
>>>> wrote
>>>> on Fri, 16 May 2008 13:53:47 -0500
>>>> <pan.2008.05.16.18.53.46.486748******.com>:
>>>>> On Fri, 16 May 2008 14:44:09 -0400, Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Fri, 16 May 2008 13:37:30 -0500, Ivan Marsh wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *This should in no way be misconstrued as an endorsement of
>>>>>>> windows. I would not knowingly trust my life to a Microsoft OS.*
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ever been in a hospital?
>>>>>> If so ,you already have.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ever go to the doctor?
>>>>>> If so, you already have.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ever go to the dentist?
>>>>>> If so you already have.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ever go to the pharmacy to get medications? If so you already have.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ....and so forth..
>>>>>
>>>>> I said I didn't WANT to know.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Well, FWIW my dentist also uses Windows to keep track of appointments.
>>>> AFAIK the drilling equipment and such is not computer-controlled. I
>>>> wouldn't worry unnecessarily.
>>>>
>>>> Bear also in mind that Java's EULA has the following clause:
>>>>
>>>> 3. RESTRICTIONS. [...] You acknowledge that Licensed Software is not
>>>> designed or intended for use in the design, construction, operation or
>>>> maintenance of any nuclear facility. Sun Microsystems, Inc. disclaims
>>>> any express or implied warranty of fitness for such uses. [...]
>>>>
>>>> (Personally, I'm not sure *any* language is explicitly intended for
>>>> use in the design of nuclear facilities -- or anything else, really.
>>>> It's a strange inclusion, though.)
>>>
>>> It's not that strange.
>>>
>>> Microsoft's license indemnifies them from any catastrophic failure of
>>> their software.
>>>
>>> It's sad that part of any software license pretty much says "Do not use
>>> this software to do anything important."
>>>
>>> At least Java went to Mars.
>>
>> Was Java running the innards of that 40 million dollar Tonka Toy that
>> went brain dead on Mars 10 minutes after it landed?
>
> Suggesting that hitting Mars much less landing safely on the surface is
> trivial?

Not at all.

The thing fscked up.

I'm just wondering if Java was what fscked it up.

> I don't know which systems Java was used in exactly... I just know it was
> along for the ride.


--
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

In article <3k91g5-cqr.ln1@sirius.tg00suus7038.net>,
The Ghost In The Machine <ewill@sirius.tg00suus7038.net> wrote:
>
>(Personally, I'm not sure *any* language is explicitly
>intended for use in the design of nuclear facilities --

ADA?

"the wharf rat" <wrat@panix.com> wrote in message
news:g0l1rm$b44$1@reader2.panix.com...
> In article <3k91g5-cqr.ln1@sirius.tg00suus7038.net>,
> The Ghost In The Machine <ewill@sirius.tg00suus7038.net> wrote:
>>
>>(Personally, I'm not sure *any* language is explicitly
>>intended for use in the design of nuclear facilities --
>
> ADA?
>

CHILL, been a while since I used that, in fact I can't remember the syntax
at all.

"-hh" <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> wrote in message
news:1ad715c9-92b6-481a-8824-c49183714982@w7g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
> "dennis@home" <den...@killspam.kicks-ass.net> wrote:
>>
>> ... no mention of vista gives you several
>> choices including: linux, Mac, XP, 98, 95, CE,
>> pSOS, DOS, and loads of others. Choose the best
>> one for the application and everything will be fine.
>
> IIRC, the USN had been using NT on some of their ships a couple of
> years ago.
>
> Here's some links:
>
> <http://www.gcn.com/print/17_17/33727-1.html>
>
> <http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/1998/07/13987>
>
> <http://windowsitpro.com/article/arti...nt-sinks-navy-
> ship.html>
>
> These are all pretty dated; not sure if there's more current info
> online or not.

I remember reading that at the time it happened. I would have thought the
navy would have used something much more stable for critical operations.
Also more secure, like OpenBSD or something. Also cluster them for fail
over. Using NT was stupid, could have been real bad if they failed in an
active combat war zone at sea.

Canuck57 wrote:

> I remember reading that at the time it happened. I would have thought the
> navy would have used something much more stable for critical operations.
> Also more secure, like OpenBSD or something. Also cluster them for fail
> over. Using NT was stupid, could have been real bad if they failed in an
> active combat war zone at sea.

NT Fail? What exactly do you know about Windows NT and its
stability/reliability?

Steve

Moshe Goldfarb <brick.n.straw******.com> writes:

>On Fri, 16 May 2008 16:47:58 -0500, Ivan Marsh wrote:

>> On Fri, 16 May 2008 14:06:43 -0700, The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
>>
>>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Ivan Marsh <ivanmarsh******.com>
>>> wrote
>>> on Fri, 16 May 2008 13:53:47 -0500
>>> <pan.2008.05.16.18.53.46.486748******.com>:
>>>> On Fri, 16 May 2008 14:44:09 -0400, Moshe Goldfarb wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, 16 May 2008 13:37:30 -0500, Ivan Marsh wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> *This should in no way be misconstrued as an endorsement of windows.
>>>>>> I would not knowingly trust my life to a Microsoft OS.*
>>>>>
>>>>> Ever been in a hospital?
>>>>> If so ,you already have.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ever go to the doctor?
>>>>> If so, you already have.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ever go to the dentist?
>>>>> If so you already have.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ever go to the pharmacy to get medications? If so you already have.
>>>>>
>>>>> ....and so forth..
>>>>
>>>> I said I didn't WANT to know.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Well, FWIW my dentist also uses Windows to keep track of appointments.
>>> AFAIK the drilling equipment and such is not computer-controlled. I
>>> wouldn't worry unnecessarily.
>>>
>>> Bear also in mind that Java's EULA has the following clause:
>>>
>>> 3. RESTRICTIONS. [...] You acknowledge that Licensed Software is not
>>> designed or intended for use in the design, construction, operation or
>>> maintenance of any nuclear facility. Sun Microsystems, Inc. disclaims
>>> any express or implied warranty of fitness for such uses. [...]
>>>
>>> (Personally, I'm not sure *any* language is explicitly intended for use
>>> in the design of nuclear facilities -- or anything else, really. It's a
>>> strange inclusion, though.)
>>
>> It's not that strange.
>>
>> Microsoft's license indemnifies them from any catastrophic failure of
>> their software.

They can say anything they want in their license. the question is whetehr
the courts will accept it.
Eg, a ski lift operator here even had a sign disclaiming responsibil8ity if
anything went wrong with the lifts. They were successfully sued then their
lift broken and injured a bunch of people.


>>
>> It's sad that part of any software license pretty much says "Do not use
>> this software to do anything important."
>>
>> At least Java went to Mars.

>Was Java running the innards of that 40 million dollar Tonka Toy that went
>brain dead on Mars 10 minutes after it landed?


>--
>Moshe Goldfarb
>Collector of soaps from around the globe.
>Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
>http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

On Fri, 16 May 2008 23:29:47 GMT, Unruh wrote:


> They can say anything they want in their license. the question is whetehr
> the courts will accept it.
> Eg, a ski lift operator here even had a sign disclaiming responsibil8ity if
> anything went wrong with the lifts. They were successfully sued then their
> lift broken and injured a bunch of people.

Correct.
That's the old roller/ice skate rink analogy.
Every one of these places has a sign that they are not resposnible for
injuries.
True if some idiot who has never skated before tries a "Hammil Camel" and
breaks his neck due to completely to his own stupidity.

Maybe not so true if it can be proven that the ice was defective, dirty or
the rental skates were poor quality or that the owner didn't police the
riff raff and someone tossed a soda can under the poor bloke's skates in
the middle of his performance.

It all depends......




--
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

Steve de Mena wrote:
> Canuck57 wrote:
>
>> I remember reading that at the time it happened. I would have thought
>> the navy would have used something much more stable for critical
>> operations. Also more secure, like OpenBSD or something. Also cluster
>> them for fail over. Using NT was stupid, could have been real bad if
>> they failed in an active combat war zone at sea.
>
>
> NT Fail? What exactly do you know about Windows NT and its
> stability/reliability?
>
> Steve

Pay no attention to him. He's just an MS hating lying linux troll.
Frank

On Fri, 16 May 2008 16:42:31 -0700, Frank <fb@sto.clm> wrote:

>Steve de Mena wrote:
>> Canuck57 wrote:
>>
>>> I remember reading that at the time it happened. I would have thought
>>> the navy would have used something much more stable for critical
>>> operations. Also more secure, like OpenBSD or something. Also cluster
>>> them for fail over. Using NT was stupid, could have been real bad if
>>> they failed in an active combat war zone at sea.
>>
>>
>> NT Fail? What exactly do you know about Windows NT and its
>> stability/reliability?
>>
>> Steve
>
>Pay no attention to him. He's just an MS hating lying linux troll.
>Frank

Frank of course is a sheep molesting, pathological liar and all around
putz, doofus and world class moron. We all got your number Frank. No
matter what you say, we know you're a psycho, a pervert and mental
midget with absolutely no redeeming qualities at all.

Steve de Mena wrote:
> John wrote:
>>
>> "Steve de Mena" <steve@stevedemena.com> wrote in message
>> news:qfudncEI1P8olLDVnZ2dnUVZ_qzinZ2d@giganews.com ...
>>> hsyq8xg******.com wrote:
>>>> www.gcn.com/print/27_8/46117-1.html
>>>>
>>>> Interesting quotes --
>>>>
>>>> “We have achieved the promises of Moore’s Law,”
>>>>
>>>> “Much more pervasive now is the problem with software.”
>>>>
>>>> “Software is getting bigger and more complex,"
>>>>
>>>> "The Windows Vista operating system is so much bigger than its
>>>> predecessors, that it is not any faster even though processing speeds
>>>> have increased.”
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> = = = ==================================
>>>>
>>>
>>> I don't see anywhere in this article where they say what OSs they are
>>> using.
>>>
>>> Steve
>>
>> Advocating junk again AS USUAL I see.
>
> I was making a statement of FACT, as usual.
>
> Stev


No you stated NO FACT. The article clearly mentioned Vista.

On Fri, 16 May 2008 18:49:20 -0500, Adam Albright wrote:

> On Fri, 16 May 2008 16:42:31 -0700, Frank <fb@sto.clm> wrote:
>
>>Steve de Mena wrote:
>>> Canuck57 wrote:
>>>
>>>> I remember reading that at the time it happened. I would have thought
>>>> the navy would have used something much more stable for critical
>>>> operations. Also more secure, like OpenBSD or something. Also cluster
>>>> them for fail over. Using NT was stupid, could have been real bad if
>>>> they failed in an active combat war zone at sea.
>>>
>>>
>>> NT Fail? What exactly do you know about Windows NT and its
>>> stability/reliability?
>>>
>>> Steve
>>
>>Pay no attention to him. He's just an MS hating lying linux troll.
>>Frank
>
> Frank of course is a sheep molesting, pathological liar and all around
> putz, doofus and world class moron. We all got your number Frank. No
> matter what you say, we know you're a psycho, a pervert and mental
> midget with absolutely no redeeming qualities at all.

Please don't mention sheep molesting in comp.os.linux.advocacy because you
are sure to wake up Roy Schestowitz.

There is good reason why he is known around the campus. as "baaaa baaa
Schestowitz"




--
Moshe Goldfarb
Collector of soaps from around the globe.
Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

"Ivan Marsh" <ivanmarsh******.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2008.05.16.18.37.28.500559******.com...
> On Fri, 16 May 2008 10:56:01 -0700, -hh wrote:
>
>> "dennis@home" <den...@killspam.kicks-ass.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> ... no mention of vista gives you several choices including: linux,
>>> Mac, XP, 98, 95, CE, pSOS, DOS, and loads of others. Choose the best
>>> one for the application and everything will be fine.
>>
>> IIRC, the USN had been using NT on some of their ships a couple of years
>> ago.
>>
>> Here's some links:
>>
>> <http://www.gcn.com/print/17_17/33727-1.html>
>>
>> <http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/1998/07/13987>
>>
>> <http://windowsitpro.com/article/arti...nt-sinks-navy-
>> ship.html>
>>
>> These are all pretty dated; not sure if there's more current info online
>> or not.
>
> Sorry... but the Yorktown meltdown had to do with a divide by zero error
> in the engine power interface when the operator entered zero into a data
> input field which was the fault of the person who programmed the control
> software and had nothing to do with the operating system.
>
> *This should in no way be misconstrued as an endorsement of windows. I
> would not knowingly trust my life to a Microsoft OS.*

It still highlights the general poor quality of MS-Windows programming
methodologies spilling into serious software development cycles and today's
design techniques. While software has become more complex, it is also true
the teams developing it are much larger, better funded and generally less
disciplined. We somehow think a business NET ad-hoc programmer makes a
embedded systems programmer, and that is a fallacy for greed.

Quite frankly, it scares me to think MS-Windows is in command and control of
some warships, or even anything else. I wouldn't even board a cruise ship
if I thought it needed MS-Windows to make it go. Leave MS-Windows in the
pursers office, or the cocktail lounge. But not on the trim, power,
navigation -- sorry -- just don't trust the crap.

But people have already died because of MS-Windows insecurity and it isn't
widely acknowledged. Take the big NE power outage a couple of years ago.
At first, US said Canada did it, then Canada said the US did it. When in
fact it was some Microsoft Windows virus on a SCADA control network making
response so pitiful the power grid popped off line. Those dependant on
electricity, say a home medical device of some sort, some died.

Cite:
http://www.news.com/2100-1011_3-5063997.html

Yet we blindly fall into the pit of MS-Windows is good everywhere. When it
is clearly, as in Vista's case, and unpredictable over complex piece of
bloatware not fit for use anywhere except a wet fanboys dreams.

We need to get back to basics in this business and skip the caffeinated hype
turkey talk.



-----------
Incoming, oops, reboot - boom!