Showing posts with label software. Show all posts
Showing posts with label software. Show all posts

Friday, January 24, 2020

My Thoughts: MySql or MariaDb for Beginners in 2020

MySql for learning purposes.

Go with MariaDb when you have more experience with MySql. Most things you will need are supported by both DB. Once you have more experience, you can move onto MariaDb if you believe that is a better option.

One of the biggest reasons is that there is more resources available for MySql. Most MariaDb refers to MySql, but it seems to be starting to branch a little. 

Another big reason is the a graphical interface, GUI, or IDE. Most are not free for MariaDb. Although some articles say that you can use MySql, there are also recent articles that state that MariaDb is starting to not work or less stable. From personal experience, I have had no problems with DBeaver with MariaDb.

Thursday, May 9, 2019

My Thoughts: "...people used to be called pirates. Now they're open source enthusiasts."


I found it quite entertaining reading the comments to a blog by Jeff Atwood (https://blog.codinghorror.com/we-dont-use-software-that-costs-money-here/). A large amount of them were dedicated to a single paragraph: "It's tempting to ascribe this to the 'cult of no-pay', programmers and users who simply won't pay for software no matter how good it is, or how inexpensive it may be. These people used to be called pirates. Now they're open source enthusiasts."

Why I find this so fascinating was how at-arms people were defending themselves as if the paragraph was a personal attack on them as software users. At first, I just thought it was the one or two people who always make a big deal about a small thing (the paragraph was not even the point of the blog). But as I continued to read, you see comments (paraphrasing): "long time reading, but not anymore." All over few statements (did I mention that it was not even the point of the blog?).

Still and in a more serious tone, the commenters even appeared to have missed the whole point of the paragraph. First to address the logical problem that keeps irking me. A lot of commenters were basically saying "pirates != open source enthusiasts" but the paragraph reads more like "pirates then open source enthusiasts".

Besides the logical discrepancy, the definition of "pirate" isn't the typical use of the actual people who "steals" software. From the usage, I took the scope of the meaning of pirate to be the group of people who used paid-software for free by downloading hacked or opened software or obtaining keys illegally. Common things that I saw back in college: MS Windows, MS Office, Starcraft, etc.

To me it was felt so ironic that those defending to never have been a pirate probably has used pirated products (I am clumping in MP3 and movies here)... with or without their knowledge. At least back in the day, that was the sign of a good technical engineer... so it is very hard for me to imagine an IT/SW person to not have used pirated products.

Perhaps the confusion is due to the use of the term "open source" instead of "free" or "cost-free" software. Because some commenters were saying "free" being open-source instead of closed-source software. But the article is about costs, so I am not sure why the confusion exists.

Basically, I read the paragraph of people who were users of pirated software are now users of open source software. I have the same sentiments. With more readily available no-cost software, most people have steered more away from pirated software.

Disclaimer

I am pretty sure I've posted a blog about this (blame my fault memory). The periods outside of the quotes are intentional... it just bugs me to use periods within quotes when it is not related to the quote.

Also, I am not sure why I am easily amused by these things.

Reference

https://blog.codinghorror.com/we-dont-use-software-that-costs-money-here/
https://perlbuzz.com/2008/04/10/open_source_is_not_piracy/

Tuesday, August 8, 2017

Disable pop-up "This file has been modified outside of the source editor" VS2013

 Disable the pop-up to reload a file in Visual Studio 2013:
This file has been modified outside of the source editor.

Visual Studio 2013
Tools > Environment > Documents > Detect when file is changed outside the environment



This occurs because the employer just implemented a file syncing system.

Monday, November 18, 2013

Work Life: HealthCare.gov - Search Returns SQL Query-like Results

I didn't think this would actually work after reading this on a blog. What you see as the results are some sql queries. Although it looks kind of dangerous at first, these results are likely from other users entering these terms likely trying to hack into the website. Or also very likely (and hopefully), these could also be from third-party vendors who do website security checks because these are fairly common tables that you would try if you were going to guess at what the table names are.

Even if the attempts were legal, the results are very poor. I even tried one just to see if there were any results. After a few more times, I also noticed that the suggestion results changed. This may potentially just be other people trying the search terms after seeing the post thus skewing the results as well.

My interest in this is primarily on the software release and software testing side. After these spotlight issues, these are the type of things you would consider in a typical software test. I've learned my lessons in this same area over a decade ago. Even then, I've had preventions to these types of attacks. So although I cringe at the thought that something like this could come about, I am also somewhat relieved that this can be overlooked even at such a product with that level of scrutiny. 

In this case, the suggestion feature still works. The results are just not very good quality for your standard insurance seeking web visitor. Even as an software engineer, this probably wouldn't help me find what I want although it would be neat to customize my own search query. I could perhaps write something that would be specific to my needs instead of a common person's template.

But let us say that this does happen to your company, how do we prevent this from happening in the future? My quick take on this is that there is no good process to prevent something like this because it is a type of issue where once you've identified it, the issue will be fixed thus highly unlikely this will reoccur. For regression testing, you would add this to your set of search terms to look out for. I am sure that they most likely have sql injection prevention implemented in the back-end, but that does not necessarily mean that the search results would be ok. In the regression test, it would be important to make sure that the results are also good.

But how do you test result quality? At first glance, this does not appear to be something that can be automated because there are just too many ways a user could enter information. The search does not have a clear measurable method to evaluate what a good result is. These are things that search engineers battle everyday and still try to improve. Even if you find the right formulas for the common users, you may find someone trying to exploit the algorithm thus throwing the results off.

From what I can come up with at the moment, the best method is to investigate the more likely sql injection queries and have exceptions to those searches. This would not prevent other poor searches, but at least it would prevent some bad publicity while the program team figures a way to improve the algorithm.




Reference:
https://plus.google.com/111405772080232969785/posts/P1ZEXFo681C

Wednesday, July 24, 2013

Review: MS Visio 2010 - End Text overlap, unable to move text

This complaint is that I still cannot find a way to move text attached to connectors (i.e. links, associations, etc.). I always resort to hiding all the text and using a generic text box which is much easier to handle and update. I just do not understand why MS Visio just cannot do basic tasks well. 80% of the work uses the same basic components.

1. The default endpoint text is only four characters long, and already overlaps if two connectors are next to each other (see End5 - End8, or yellow highligh). If you try to rotate, the rotation is static to a certain rotation point.

2. As you can see in End11 (blue highlight), this rotates into the box. Makes me really thing how Microsoft even tests these functions. How is this not obvious during a development test, system test, user acceptance test, or any other test?

3. If you rotate the text all the way around for End9 (red highlight), this will overlap with the other end text if the objects are too close. Not only that, the text is inverted in reference to the other endpoint (End10). I do not know whether I am more surprised that this did not bother anyone in testing either or more surprised that there are some people who cannot read sideway texts without moving their head.



On top of that, connector names are not defaulted to show. Even if I show, it is static and cannot be moved or rotated. It's auto-draw of connectors is pretty poor. And this does not come with the office suite, so there are extra securities I have to go through to get Visio for work.

If you are looking for a free UML designer, I've used ArgoUML in the past and found it satisfactory. There are pros and cons compared to Visio, although it has been several years since I last used ArgoUML.