From his response to the challenge to the electoral college:
I believe that a principal cause of voter apathy is the constant bitter partisan divisions and growing cynicism in Washington. I am running to try to change that atmosphere, to lead by uniting rather than dividing, to shoot straight, and to set aside partisan differences and set an agenda that makes sense for working Americans.
Now - how many times does this man attack Clinton (and Gore) on this page? How many times does he give credit? He's just as divisive as the rest of 'em. At least the rest of 'em are honest about it.
I realize most slashdotters are smart enuff to figure that out for themselves. I just bite when my intelligence is insulted!
Why were these kids sick and wanted to be famous? Could it be the vicious cycle where the peers rather than support those on a bad path (flame away) reject them? Hmm?
If you want some serious security, get keycards or fingerprinting hardware or retina scanning.
A key can be stolen.
A keycode can be extorted.
A finger can be chopped off.
Even if you chop the head off, the retina scanning will fail.
Anyhow - there is no logging of what goes on with regular keys. If somebody does manage to gain access, it'll be all over your logs. (Which hopefully will be within a room it's REALLY tough to get into).
Two of-courses:
1 - Logging all entries can be said to infringe upon privacy of employees.
2 - This alone is not enough to even deny physical access. This is only enough to make it hard as hell to gain access without triggering alarms.
Anyhow, think about this before you buy those expensive locks you'll need to replace every time a key goes missing.
This is an ongoing trend that is getting worse as we go. The media will sensationalize anything, including character and dry facts. Their punchlines at the end of the report is just one tool.
Consistently (with a few exceptions outside of politics), they choose presentation over substance. You know why? Because in the media, money matters, and the dimwits outnumber the smart people. By catering to the dimwits, they get more money for having a larger audience. It's that blindingly simple. There is little incentive for them to be factually correct and nuanced when they can walk all over the topic with their flashy sensationalist moonboots.
I have seen some ideas around.. I think we'll see the first workable solutions within a few years. How it's gonna turn out, I don't know.. We'll probably wear some sort of 3D glasses and gloves.
How it's gonna work, I'm not sure.. However, I have a strong feeling the (initial) Linux implementation will be based upon X and OpenGL. That's what i vaguely remember seeing a good while ago - here on slashdot.
Anyhow, I can't wait to literally pick up those core dumps and throw them into that wastebasket!
My point is that once that gets going, a P4 will look somewhat weak - unless we stick two GeForces in..
The specweb99 pages do not include a single apache setup.
Furthermore, there IS something like a Red Hat 6.2 system.
BTW - I bet apache 2.x with the 2.4 khttpd also would make a killing;)
Tux is a red hat product. it's a multithreaded http server that does parts of its good deeds in kernel space. Watch out for apache 2.x on linux 2.4, though.. It'll achieve much of the same.. Tux just beat them to it.
I have seen many different benchmarks. Some get Linux out ahead, some IIS.. Tux has been shown to kick butt as well.
The problem with the Apache 1.x series, is that it's not threaded. That means that memory usage under heavy load is outrageous compared to a threaded solution. So - I'm guessing this might be part of the problem.
Apache 2.x will be threaded. You can download their alphas if you're really curios.
Tux 1.0 at Red Hat is a good performer as well. It's kernel based, threaded and extremely high performance. You might want to check that out! Source is available, though the licensing is not listing.. Anybody know?
Furthermore, if you get the 2.4 kernel, it also has a kernel space http stack that's used for static content. That way, apache can do what it does best, while all images and static pages will be handled by the kernel space server. Neat, huh?
Well - to be perfectly honest, the gnutella protocol needs drastic enough improvements that backwards compability is a pipe dream. Gnutella needs a lot of stuff - right now, it's not fit to handle what we throw at it. The idea of distributed searches in real time is kick-ass, though:)
Well - I am also opening myself to flaming of the charring severity. However - it should not matter too much if you go with perl or php when you make database applications. The reason is simple - most of the system resources will go to the database daemons anyway provided the language is somewhat efficient. Disk access is incredibly expensive in computing terms. When you're dealing with a large database, that will probably dwarf what goes on in your script (unless you decide to read the results from a large query into an associative array or something equally dumb).
So - for your purposes, I'd say PHP unless you know perl already - simply because the learning curve on PHP is nicer than on perl.
and standardized interapplication communication. Thus gnome and kde are good efforts. I do agree with you that you should not have to choose sides over some lowtech little dooda app. However, if you save code by choosing sides, I totally understand and encourage the coder to use either Gnome or KDE.
Yes, we should enjoy the great software. However, from a point-of-view of reality, we should go for Gnome. Even though KDE is nice and all, the Qt is free for non-commercial use, we should stick to Gnome. Why? Because though free software is good, there are still corporations out there trying to make money. It should be possible to develop for a platform and sell the product, and not pay out to someone for the development tools. If you can't, there would be one less advantage in the Linux vs Win32 battle for developers.
So - KDE is nice and usable, but it's bad for Linux in attracting commercial developers. If you honestly think that all software for Win32 could be produced openly, go for KDE. Otherwise, swallow some pride and work on a good C++ interface for GTK and Gnome!
Though it may seem easy by the masses of lamers, connecting to the IRC is harder than connecting to napster. Thus, they either figure it's too hard to use for the mainstream, it's too hard to use for them or they're all irc junkies who want to escape into irc once in an hour.
As in a reptile that's remarkably stealthy - it will change colors according to the environment. As in - this browser is the ultimate since it does the job without flashing you with features. A great name!
Allright, allright.. I was in a bit of overzealous zealot mode. Still, after reading up on the QPL, I have a concern that deals directly with why SUN and HP are going for GNOME and GTK:
If you are going to charge money for your Qt application, you must pay TrollTech for the professional edition.
That licensing restriction does not bode well for application development for KDE. Why would you want to pay 1550 usd per developer when you could get that for free?
If Qt 3.x comes out, and KDE does modifications that require you to install Qt 3.x, you're screwed if you want your application to live on. As simple as that!
If I was a large corporation and was to select between a platform controlled by a different corporation or a platform I would be able to contribute to - what would I choose?
Qt is not free as in speech. If the Gnome team at Sun or HP or otherwise figure out something needed in GTK, they can code it up themselves and submit the patch. If it doesn't get accepted, they can implement the changes as a separate library within the Gnome project. Sure they could submit changes to Qt, but why give code to a company that might later charge for it?
Moreover, what would stop Troll Tech from charging for Qt in the future? For commercial apps? Not much, fellow slashdotters.
I think KDE is great. However, I wouldn't want to put lots of manhours into a project that isn't 100% free. (Give it a whack, BSDers).
So - they chose Gnome. Totally free. Maybe not quite as good as KDE yet - but still it's what I use for my work. And - it's working nicely for me.
If Microsoft just wanted to run their apps, why not put some weight into the WINE project? If WINE was kept up-to-date, all Microsoft apps (and other Win32 apps as well) would run on Linux.
Only problem is that they would have to give away all those allegeded secret system calls. If Office uses as much of the OS as the rumor has it, I have a hard time believing they would even try.
To be honest, it would be a LOT more cost-effective for them to rewrite from scratch. MS - fire up GLADE and get cracking!
I am not sure if they would be that different to be honest. Speakers of inflective languages have the freedom to create computer languages as they please. Would they not have done so (expect your example) long ago if there had been an advantage?
I'm not claiming the superiority of one language over another. However, it's pretty interesting to see how most languages are being torn down by the casualization of modern society. For some reason, human languages are becoming more and more ambiguous. People decide that certain grammatical constructs are a pain, and stop using them - even though they are needed to communicate precise ideas. Is this democratization of linguistical/syntactical/semantical decisions a good thing? Basically - are we going to see a move back to Latin as English becomes to imprecise it would no longer be of real use? There might be a reason why there was a need to create legalese beyond their feel to be special and exclusive.
Actually, MS is XMLizing their documents as far as I know. (Haven't touched that platform for more than a few hours in a long time). If they XMLize, somebody should be able to make a ms office compatible xml parser.
Macros and UI is worse - and maybe undesirable.
Ok.. Been a while since I was a kid. I'm not saying this will be perfect, either. However, there are words that parents don't want their kids to see anyway. If you block that (maybe even personalize the blocking), you'll be giving it your best shot.
Does some reviewing of the mp3s on their site. You can review them yourself as well. They also send out optional free emails notifying you of well reviewed new songs.
Well - I advice you take out whatever contains words like (for demonstrative purposes) &cunt&, &slut&, &large rod&, &purple monster&. Leave in words like &breast&, &penis&, & vagina& and such. You can't block it all, but you can give it a fair shot without trampling all over clean content.
Unfortunately, you'll need to check all incoming traffic for this if you want to be remotely effective. Set up a proxy that looks through what they access. Set up a firewall that only allows the proxy to come through.
However, I'm pretty sure you'll find legitimate content blocked if you log all blocked content (you should).
Slashdot Mirror
From his response to the challenge to the electoral college:
Now - how many times does this man attack Clinton (and Gore) on this page? How many times does he give credit? He's just as divisive as the rest of 'em. At least the rest of 'em are honest about it.
I realize most slashdotters are smart enuff to figure that out for themselves. I just bite when my intelligence is insulted!
Why were these kids sick and wanted to be famous? Could it be the vicious cycle where the peers rather than support those on a bad path (flame away) reject them? Hmm?
If you want some serious security, get keycards or fingerprinting hardware or retina scanning.
A key can be stolen.
A keycode can be extorted.
A finger can be chopped off.
Even if you chop the head off, the retina scanning will fail.
Anyhow - there is no logging of what goes on with regular keys. If somebody does manage to gain access, it'll be all over your logs. (Which hopefully will be within a room it's REALLY tough to get into).
Two of-courses:
1 - Logging all entries can be said to infringe upon privacy of employees.
2 - This alone is not enough to even deny physical access. This is only enough to make it hard as hell to gain access without triggering alarms.
Anyhow, think about this before you buy those expensive locks you'll need to replace every time a key goes missing.
This is an ongoing trend that is getting worse as we go. The media will sensationalize anything, including character and dry facts. Their punchlines at the end of the report is just one tool.
Consistently (with a few exceptions outside of politics), they choose presentation over substance. You know why? Because in the media, money matters, and the dimwits outnumber the smart people. By catering to the dimwits, they get more money for having a larger audience. It's that blindingly simple. There is little incentive for them to be factually correct and nuanced when they can walk all over the topic with their flashy sensationalist moonboots.
Anyhow, that's my 2c.
I have seen some ideas around.. I think we'll see the first workable solutions within a few years. How it's gonna turn out, I don't know.. We'll probably wear some sort of 3D glasses and gloves.
How it's gonna work, I'm not sure.. However, I have a strong feeling the (initial) Linux implementation will be based upon X and OpenGL. That's what i vaguely remember seeing a good while ago - here on slashdot.
Anyhow, I can't wait to literally pick up those core dumps and throw them into that wastebasket!
My point is that once that gets going, a P4 will look somewhat weak - unless we stick two GeForces in..
The specweb99 pages do not include a single apache setup. Furthermore, there IS something like a Red Hat 6.2 system. BTW - I bet apache 2.x with the 2.4 khttpd also would make a killing ;)
Tux is a red hat product. it's a multithreaded http server that does parts of its good deeds in kernel space. Watch out for apache 2.x on linux 2.4, though.. It'll achieve much of the same.. Tux just beat them to it.
I have seen many different benchmarks. Some get Linux out ahead, some IIS.. Tux has been shown to kick butt as well.
The problem with the Apache 1.x series, is that it's not threaded. That means that memory usage under heavy load is outrageous compared to a threaded solution. So - I'm guessing this might be part of the problem.
Apache 2.x will be threaded. You can download their alphas if you're really curios.
Tux 1.0 at Red Hat is a good performer as well. It's kernel based, threaded and extremely high performance. You might want to check that out! Source is available, though the licensing is not listing.. Anybody know?Furthermore, if you get the 2.4 kernel, it also has a kernel space http stack that's used for static content. That way, apache can do what it does best, while all images and static pages will be handled by the kernel space server. Neat, huh?
Hey - I would download that in a heartbeat. Nothing like marvelling at exactly how easy it is to activate the virus that goes by Win9x.
Maybe i'd even open a port for the trojan it contains, just for the fun of it?
Well - to be perfectly honest, the gnutella protocol needs drastic enough improvements that backwards compability is a pipe dream. Gnutella needs a lot of stuff - right now, it's not fit to handle what we throw at it. The idea of distributed searches in real time is kick-ass, though :)
Well - I am also opening myself to flaming of the charring severity. However - it should not matter too much if you go with perl or php when you make database applications. The reason is simple - most of the system resources will go to the database daemons anyway provided the language is somewhat efficient. Disk access is incredibly expensive in computing terms. When you're dealing with a large database, that will probably dwarf what goes on in your script (unless you decide to read the results from a large query into an associative array or something equally dumb).
So - for your purposes, I'd say PHP unless you know perl already - simply because the learning curve on PHP is nicer than on perl.
and standardized interapplication communication. Thus gnome and kde are good efforts. I do agree with you that you should not have to choose sides over some lowtech little dooda app. However, if you save code by choosing sides, I totally understand and encourage the coder to use either Gnome or KDE.
Yes, we should enjoy the great software. However, from a point-of-view of reality, we should go for Gnome. Even though KDE is nice and all, the Qt is free for non-commercial use, we should stick to Gnome. Why? Because though free software is good, there are still corporations out there trying to make money. It should be possible to develop for a platform and sell the product, and not pay out to someone for the development tools. If you can't, there would be one less advantage in the Linux vs Win32 battle for developers.
So - KDE is nice and usable, but it's bad for Linux in attracting commercial developers. If you honestly think that all software for Win32 could be produced openly, go for KDE. Otherwise, swallow some pride and work on a good C++ interface for GTK and Gnome!
Though it may seem easy by the masses of lamers, connecting to the IRC is harder than connecting to napster. Thus, they either figure it's too hard to use for the mainstream, it's too hard to use for them or they're all irc junkies who want to escape into irc once in an hour.
As in a reptile that's remarkably stealthy - it will change colors according to the environment. As in - this browser is the ultimate since it does the job without flashing you with features. A great name!
Allright, allright.. I was in a bit of overzealous zealot mode. Still, after reading up on the QPL, I have a concern that deals directly with why SUN and HP are going for GNOME and GTK:
If you are going to charge money for your Qt application, you must pay TrollTech for the professional edition.
That licensing restriction does not bode well for application development for KDE. Why would you want to pay 1550 usd per developer when you could get that for free?
If Qt 3.x comes out, and KDE does modifications that require you to install Qt 3.x, you're screwed if you want your application to live on. As simple as that!
If I was a large corporation and was to select between a platform controlled by a different corporation or a platform I would be able to contribute to - what would I choose?
Qt is not free as in speech. If the Gnome team at Sun or HP or otherwise figure out something needed in GTK, they can code it up themselves and submit the patch. If it doesn't get accepted, they can implement the changes as a separate library within the Gnome project. Sure they could submit changes to Qt, but why give code to a company that might later charge for it?
Moreover, what would stop Troll Tech from charging for Qt in the future? For commercial apps? Not much, fellow slashdotters.
I think KDE is great. However, I wouldn't want to put lots of manhours into a project that isn't 100% free. (Give it a whack, BSDers).
So - they chose Gnome. Totally free. Maybe not quite as good as KDE yet - but still it's what I use for my work. And - it's working nicely for me.
If Microsoft just wanted to run their apps, why not put some weight into the WINE project? If WINE was kept up-to-date, all Microsoft apps (and other Win32 apps as well) would run on Linux.
Only problem is that they would have to give away all those allegeded secret system calls. If Office uses as much of the OS as the rumor has it, I have a hard time believing they would even try.
To be honest, it would be a LOT more cost-effective for them to rewrite from scratch. MS - fire up GLADE and get cracking!
I am not sure if they would be that different to be honest. Speakers of inflective languages have the freedom to create computer languages as they please. Would they not have done so (expect your example) long ago if there had been an advantage?
I'm not claiming the superiority of one language over another. However, it's pretty interesting to see how most languages are being torn down by the casualization of modern society. For some reason, human languages are becoming more and more ambiguous. People decide that certain grammatical constructs are a pain, and stop using them - even though they are needed to communicate precise ideas. Is this democratization of linguistical/syntactical/semantical decisions a good thing? Basically - are we going to see a move back to Latin as English becomes to imprecise it would no longer be of real use? There might be a reason why there was a need to create legalese beyond their feel to be special and exclusive.
Actually, MS is XMLizing their documents as far as I know. (Haven't touched that platform for more than a few hours in a long time). If they XMLize, somebody should be able to make a ms office compatible xml parser. Macros and UI is worse - and maybe undesirable.
Ok.. Been a while since I was a kid. I'm not saying this will be perfect, either. However, there are words that parents don't want their kids to see anyway. If you block that (maybe even personalize the blocking), you'll be giving it your best shot.
Does some reviewing of the mp3s on their site. You can review them yourself as well. They also send out optional free emails notifying you of well reviewed new songs.
Well - I advice you take out whatever contains words like (for demonstrative purposes) &cunt&, &slut&, &large rod&, &purple monster&. Leave in words like &breast&, &penis&, & vagina& and such. You can't block it all, but you can give it a fair shot without trampling all over clean content.
Unfortunately, you'll need to check all incoming traffic for this if you want to be remotely effective. Set up a proxy that looks through what they access. Set up a firewall that only allows the proxy to come through.
However, I'm pretty sure you'll find legitimate content blocked if you log all blocked content (you should).
If high CD prices bother you, buy used CDs. RIAA doesn't make a dime on them, either.
I stand corrected.. I would however say that NASA should demand all subcontractors to use Metric as well :)