Slashdot Mirror

Did you notice that Mono supports numerious languages?

Did you notice that Mono is primarily an implementation of .NET, and thus subject to patent claims by Microsoft? Microsoft has stated that these patents will be avilable on a "royalty free and otherwise reasonable and non-discriminatory basis", but short of an irrevocable legally-binding release worded in such a way that it's unambiguously clear these patents can not be used against open-source software, I am unwilling to trust to their good will.

Statements like "Furthermore, our release of the Rotor source code base with a specific license on its use gives wide use to our patents for a particular (non-commercial) purpose, and as we explicitly state we are open to additional licenses for other purposes." -- Microsoft applies for .NET patent are less than encouraging.

In Europe, Microsoft are already showing their true colors: "If developers want to build the protocols into their products, they must agree not to distribute that product in source-code form, or to subject it to licenses that require source-code disclosure, a formula that excludes many open source licenses."

And they have other tricks up their sleeve, "At every release the focus of Microsoft's tools that provide a compelling Linux development environment could break or prevent mono-compatibility the same way Microsoft's J++ broke Java compatibility by replacing JavaBeans, RMI,and JNI with COM, DCOM, Direct/J. At that point, you would face the choice of either forking the API's or forking over some royalty payments." --Mono developer meeting

With Mono you can hitch your wagon to Microsoft's oxen, never knowing just where they're going to go.

The archive.org maintains its archives in several geographicaly different locations and files are mirrored between those sites. If one disk or node breaks, you still have two or more copies of that material.

If you archive serious amounts of data, redundancy within node is not the best solution, but to distrbute information between systems. For very important data, you can have as many copies as you have nodes; lesser important data may have just a single copy. If it gets lost, then ok, shit happens but so what. For example, I have just a single copy (no backups, partly RAID) of 10 TiB data (and that data is not available from P2P shop) because it is not economicaly viable to make backups. On the other hand, I have some data in 5 geographicaly diverse copies, both on-line and off-line.

• Episode 1 teaser sheets
• Does the world really need a 25 gig drive?
• Patents: how do we keep software free?

Acording to the archive.org (http://www.archive.org/web/petabox.php) they indeed have some redundancy, but not raid. They are operating each system as a separete node, and mirroring nodes. The above link also sheds light on other questions regarding TFA

"How can I remove my site's pages from the Wayback Machine? The Internet Archive is not interested in preserving or offering access to Web sites or other Internet documents of persons who do not want their materials in the collection. By placing a simple robots.txt file on your Web server, you can exclude your site from being crawled as well as exclude any historical pages from the Wayback Machine. Internet Archive uses the exclusion policy intended for use by both academic and non-academic digital repositories and archivists. See our exclusion policy. You can find exclusion directions at exclude.php. If you cannot place the robots.txt file, opt not to, or have further questions, email us at info at archive dot org."

Don't skip over the 2,851 Grateful Dead shows!

They do a lot more than that! I've just been downloading some Warren Zevon shows from their Live Music Archive.

Ah, so I'm an idiot eh? I started on the Internet in 1994, and I used Yahoo at the time, while it looked SOMEWHAT like that link, it was never that spartin, it had many more links as well as graphical 'buttons' to choose from, and it's now (in)famous 'catagories' listing all the way down the left side. The linked Yahoo Seach looks like Google, but back in the mid 90s Yahoo DID NOT. Here, take a look at Yahoo in 1996:

http://www2.yahoo.com/">http://web.archive.org/web /19961017235908/http://www2.yahoo.com/

So that's my point, Yahoo never looked as Google'd as it does now. Thanks for calling me an idiot, but next time please have something to back that up with.

I couldn't agree with this more. We did a startup in 2001 and kept a web presence up and running the whole time. The primary things we agreed would always be available:

• A technology overview. The things we were working on for technology.
• A blog for each of the principals. Not that we always updated it, but we tried.
• Resumes for each of the principals.
• Some amount of changing content on the front page. In our case we had company news, security news and virus outbreaks.
• Technical notes. These were observations on technology longer than a blog entry. We did some nontrivial analysis of various Java technologies that ended up in here.
• Downloads. We maintained a few free utilities for people to download that showcased some of our technology.

Based on this web presence, we were contacted several times with various offers, ultimately selling the technology to Sendmail, Inc. and taking full-time positions there working on the code. Now the product (Mailstream Manager) is going gangbusters under the Sendmail flag.

This is the second time we've done this kind of deal. The first time was pre-Google in 1996, so it was more of a "loud startup with good industry networking" since you couldn't STFW as effectively in those days ;). This technology is still in use today in products from Tumbleweed Communications.

Getting back to this "Do Stealth Startups Suck?" theme -- our personal perspective is that if it's so cool that you have to keep it a secret, then it isn't very cool at all. If you can't maintain an edge even if the other guy knows exactly what you're doing, then you don't have an edge. We call this the "True Lies" approach -- at the end of True Lies, Schwarzenegger explains exactly his plan for escaping from the guy who's gonna torture him, and despite the fact that the guy knows the exact plan, Schwarzenegger is able to execute it and escape.

I couldn't agree with this more. We did a startup in 2001 and kept a web presence up and running the whole time. The primary things we agreed would always be available:

• A technology overview. The things we were working on for technology.
• A blog for each of the principals. Not that we always updated it, but we tried.
• Resumes for each of the principals.
• Some amount of changing content on the front page. In our case we had company news, security news and virus outbreaks.
• Technical notes. These were observations on technology longer than a blog entry. We did some nontrivial analysis of various Java technologies that ended up in here.
• Downloads. We maintained a few free utilities for people to download that showcased some of our technology.

Based on this web presence, we were contacted several times with various offers, ultimately selling the technology to Sendmail, Inc. and taking full-time positions there working on the code. Now the product (Mailstream Manager) is going gangbusters under the Sendmail flag.

This is the second time we've done this kind of deal. The first time was pre-Google in 1996, so it was more of a "loud startup with good industry networking" since you couldn't STFW as effectively in those days ;). This technology is still in use today in products from Tumbleweed Communications.

Getting back to this "Do Stealth Startups Suck?" theme -- our personal perspective is that if it's so cool that you have to keep it a secret, then it isn't very cool at all. If you can't maintain an edge even if the other guy knows exactly what you're doing, then you don't have an edge. We call this the "True Lies" approach -- at the end of True Lies, Schwarzenegger explains exactly his plan for escaping from the guy who's gonna torture him, and despite the fact that the guy knows the exact plan, Schwarzenegger is able to execute it and escape.

Yes, but apparently poo seems to have gone by the wayside

Corrected link (removed second 'http://' which isn't actually necessary but probably causes Slashcode to end the first link):

http://web.archive.org/web/19971221012817/slashdot .org/

http://web.archive.org/web/19971221012817/http://s lashdot.org/>The Wayback Machine

How to thwart said framing: archive.org

Possible, but after studying their history I'd deem it a very good risk. They were using the name Google while based at Stanford, so they would have to change names, rather than simply pick a different one. Furthermore, the 1998 initial investment check of $100,000 was made to "Google, Inc"... before such a corporate entity existed, and probably prior to trying to register the domain. They would probably have been disinclined to change names at that point, and would have been willing to give serious consideration to such a reasonable level of extortion, especially if all three main TLDs were included in the offer. =)

2. Go back in time and bet as much as you can.

Too many successful wagers attract mob attention if you move forward in time, too many wagers on a single event warp the odds badly, and shipping growing amounts of money further and further back in time is difficult for amounts over $1M.

http://web.archive.org/bountyquest.com/patentinfo/ oneclickart.htm now has a 301 redirect to http://intranet/

And you don't need some wierd player, either. The Internet Archive offers video in about five different formats, including editable quality versions for use in other works.

How about "sorry for slashdotting lenna.org?"

This coming right after the story about Utah? Wayback, are you trying to cause the Utah law to fail?

Or you could just land using something else, like a helicopter propeller, ala the failed Rotary Rocket Company. It's not only my wallpaper, it's also a good idea ( http://web.archive.org/web/20000815071110/http://w ww.rotaryrocket.com/ ). Too bad they went out of business (Although I think several of their engineers work for Scaled Composites now).

Most Important Mirror Ever

I first ran Windows on a Mac about 8 years ago. Insignia Solutions produced SoftWindows a long time ago.

LK

Call me when this is a reality:

Leave it to Roll-oh (Worth every second of your time for a great laugh)

I expect my +1 funny mods when the genrally-painful archive.org download completes. I'd go into more deatil in this post if the 'punchline' wasn't worth the mystique :)

About seamlessly combining raster and vector image editing: It's nothing new.

I miss SuperPaint, by Silicon Beach Software, for the old black-and-white Macintosh.

It had the *perfect* combination of raster and vector painting. It also had a good balance between photo-editing features (aka Photoshop) and tools for creating a new image from scratch (aka DeluxePaint).

At the time it was written, there were no color Macintoshes, but there was still some functions in the original QuickDraw API to deal with color (mostly to support multicolored ribbons in Apple ImageWriter printers). Icons for colors in SuperPaint just had words like "Orange", "Blue", etc. that would just show up black on the screen. The amazing thing is, when the first color Macintosh II came out, I tried out SuperPaint on it, and it WORKED!! It was so well written that everything on screen was now in color, even though the developers had no way of testing it before! Amazing....

SuperPaint was eventually bought out by Aldus, and after that, it just wasn't the same. Adobe eventually bought Aldus, and SuperPaint faded into obscurity. (What is with Adobe? The same thing happened in the Windows world just a few years ago, when we lost Cool Edit, essentially the only high-quality audio editing program that was within the budget of the average home user.)

As upset as I get when I read stuff like this, eventually my head clears up and I remember that in order for a music company to hold the rights to a song, a band/musician needs to sign it over to them. Are we really going to be worse off not being able to d/l Britney Spears songs for 70-100 years? I realize that there are some bands that already made the mistake of choosing this path, but too bad for them. They got greedy and now their music will not be heard as much as, lets say, bands that allow their music to be put on http://archive.org/. I'm probably one of the few jamband fans on /., but I know the bands I listen to enjoy playing music and enjoy other listening to it. Yes they will have CD's to buy, but they will also allow you to record their live shows(better then prerecorded anyway, the test of a good band). And although I'm not sure, I think they make more money from people coming out to see them play then from CD/T-SHirt sales. So again, if you want to keep all the crap music away from the public for 100 years, I say THANK YOU.

Look at the X-ray photographs of laptops. Another one here.

You can clearly see that each "single" battery, is a serial arrangement of eight smaller cells.

This is only *one* way of running a trial. Some countries practice guilty until proven innocent, including as it happens, Indonesia.

I beg to differ. "Presumption of innocence is an essential right that the accused enjoys in criminal trials in all countries respecting human rights." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Innocent_until_prove n_guilty)

"It is better than 5, 10, 20, or 100 guilty men go free than for one innocent man to be put to death. This prinicple is embodied in the presumption of innocence. In 1895, the U.S. Supreme Court, in a decision in the case Coffin v. United States, 156 U.S. 432; 15 S. Ct. 394, traced the presumption of innocence, past England, Ancient Greece and Ancient Rome, and, at least according to Greenleaf, to Deuteronomy."
(http://web.archive.org/web/2003021 6230239/http:// www.talkleft.com/archives/001907.html)

Presumption of guilt is crazy, simple as that. That's not a case of "okay, they have a different culture, so them treating suspects a tad different than us is fine", this is a case of "if we presume guilt we might as well just imprison everyone since nobody will be able to prove innocence on EVERY crime ever commited".

Fixed link: http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://arenanet.fi.

Slashdot seems to screw up that URL if you put it in <a>. Sorry!

There was a project to create a 3D model of Helsinki about 10 years ago in VRML. I think it was a part of some bigger project they called Arenanet, which included map services etc.

The version I tried on the Net was basically quite ready in that sense that it had most if not all the buildings. The project however disappeared silently some years ago. There is still this site left with some panorama photos. The original site, arenanet.fi, does not exist any more. Some remnant may still be found at http://arenanet.fi/">the Internet Archive.

Somebody know more about this project?

IE Takes the Lead?

Sorry wrong URL: IE Takes the Lead?

Lest not forget: Netscape Behind?

The fact is, most people who switch *from IE* switch back without IE 7. The goal of IE 7 is to prevent more people from switching.

I guarantee at least 30% of the Firefox community hear about IE 7, try it, and forget to switch back.

By the way, check out this amusing little URL from Slashdots history: Netscape Behind?

http://web.archive.org/web/*/http%3A//www.dvddecry pter.com/index.php%3Fact%3Ddownload

http://www.archive.org/web/petabox.php

it uses only 60kW for 1 Peta byte

It's a mount option -- in the case of data corruption, it's usually safer to go down instantly rather than continue. However, I don't expect anyone but the worst lunatics to set it on a FAT filesystem, especially one on an USB device.

Having the kernel crash (as opposed to a panic) due to a bug in a filesystem driver is another story. I've once discovered that a maliciously malformed filesystem can send everything into the la-la land. This is where Hurd's separation of kernel structures would be useful.

Dejas only went back to 1995 though didn't they? Google's innovation was to extend the archive back to 1982. Granted Henry Spencer's tapes were used, but no one else has put them online complete back to 1982 as far as I know.

See for example David Wiseman's history of the recovery or the Salon.com overview article.

In summary, Google only really started encouraging the tape restore project about six months before groups.google.com kicked off. The idea of restoring Henry's tapes had been widely thought of in the 1990s, and Wiseman had picked them up to start the project, but it took some years to accomplish, along with help from various people and some equipment from Brewster Kahle.

And I'm leaving out a bunch of stuff. I won't try and credit everyone involved in the process here, but it was lots of people. Good on all of them.

HJ screenshots from '99: http://web.archive.org/web/20010501094458/hjvault. ign.com/screenshots/terrain/

I know, it's bad karma to reply to your own post, but...here are some of the videos, thanks to The Wayback Machine:

1. PeanutGallery.mov
2. DENNIS GETS FREE.mov
3. escape.mov
4. No luck finding Crazy.mov...

And, yes, this was from 2004, not 2001. My bad.

I know, it's bad karma to reply to your own post, but...here are some of the videos, thanks to The Wayback Machine:

1. PeanutGallery.mov
2. DENNIS GETS FREE.mov
3. escape.mov
4. No luck finding Crazy.mov...

And, yes, this was from 2004, not 2001. My bad.

I know, it's bad karma to reply to your own post, but...here are some of the videos, thanks to The Wayback Machine:

1. PeanutGallery.mov
2. DENNIS GETS FREE.mov
3. escape.mov
4. No luck finding Crazy.mov...

And, yes, this was from 2004, not 2001. My bad.

I was a founding member of the now defunct http://www.wpngg.org/"> .

We had the exact same concerns. We knew that piracy would occur, but it had to be something that was not encouraged.

LK

That's just a few hundred disk drives. Any medium sized hosting facility has more disk than that. 25TB isn't that much any more. Here's 100TB in one rack at the Internet Archive. With servers. Draws 6 kilowatts. Put together by some people I know.

Nope, just wondered the same myself some time ago. So I did the search. Just checked archive.org and they had some old stats.
http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://support.bbc.co .uk/support/

Okay. First, are you reading my previous comments trying to find ad hominem material for your argument here?

I have no ability to find your old comments. This particular comment is linked by the journal entry under your name.

Second, I stand by that statement, and I've got a few years of OSX-based consulting to lend credence to my opinion about macs, for what it's worth.

Here is an exhaustive analysis which may enlighten you as to how little regard Apple gives to consistency of the QuickTime GUI, especially on non-Mac systems. They never made QuickTime consistent on Macs... they never made it consistent on Windows... therefore why would it bother them at all that they can't make it consistent on Linux, the OS whose users are maximally tolerant of mismatched application themes?

I just look at WinAmp and shake my head.

Spot on.

I actually worked for a company that *was* iTMS, in many ways, years ago. We had a... hauntingly similar concept of where and how much people could share the songs they bought online for a buck. We were compatible with the popular MP3 devices of the time, and of course with WinAmp (and Real, back when they were serious).

Unfortunately, we were iTMS without Steve Jobs and without the iPod. Even more unfortunately, the general Napster P2P hysteria spooked the management of the parent company, and the whole thing was shitcanned.

Those of us who worked there flinch a little at every dollar iTMS makes. But at least it proves we were right.

Linky

*sigh*

http://web.archive.org/web/20041030015234/http://s hadowcrew.com/> Defaced website... dating back to october 30 2004... this story is really old... anyways if they got cut they don't even worth talking about them.. they are not 1337 at all..

They were begging for it.

Wait, what happened to the Pirate's Bay story?

even outside the us

and a real blast from the past

and let us not forget Bush's little bitch poodle

Time for the revolution then...

even outside the us

and a real blast from the past

and let us not forget Bush's little bitch poodle

Time for the revolution then...

Unfortunately, the original article has disappeared into the aether, but there's an archive.org copy of what happened to the Original Microsoft 11 here:
http://web.archive.org/web/20040202201554/http://w ww.abqtrib.com/archives/business00/041200_microsof t.shtml