good legal alternatives to RIAA crap I know you're going for something different in your comment then what I'm about to reply with but...
There are alternatives to RIAA members. I am a big fan Epitaph/Hellcat records, and it seems really up in the air as to whether or not they are an RIAA member. Lord knows they don't exactly have bands signed that would put up with this nonsense. Anyways from Wikipeida:
In mid-2005 Epitaph was added to the official list of RIAA members along with several other high-profile independent labels. The reason for the listing is not clear, but one source points to an agreement for internet P2P distribution ("Independent Labels Sign Deal With Snocap"). Another source claims label management joined RIAA in order to get certified sales awards (ie, official "Gold" or "Platinum" record status) for releases. This sparked some controversy as some feel they should no longer be labeled independent if they are a member of the RIAA.
However, the only source that has actually been used for these claims of membership is the official RIAA membership list, which has been disputed. As of this writing, not only is Epitaph listed as an official member, but Lookout! Records are once again listed, even though they were already falsely listed before. Sorry that quote was a little long in the tooth, just wanted to clarify my point. And my point is, there are some pretty excellent alternatives to the big guns of the recording industry, as well as the fact that it would appear not everyone that deals with the RIAA is expressly condoning their behavior since they are in fact involved in the certification process of top selling records.. Granted Epitaph/Hellcat caters to a certain kind of music. The fact remains there are many smaller labels out there for everyone.
Seems like now, more than ever, would be a good time to support local artists and brick-and-mortar record stores that cater (however slight) to the independent and local music scenes. The Record Exchange - Boise, ID FTW
it probably won't validate anyway Ain't that the truth, brother... I find myself coding for the program parsing the information, way more often then I am coding for the standards. As coding standards-based markup always runs into issues.
You're kidding, right? They literally wrote the standard. Well yes they (as long as the 'they' you are refering to is the W3C) did, and no where in the standards they have approved does it call for every system parsing a document with a DTD, to request that information over and over again. Especially considering that data tends to remains static once committed to an official standard.
From the article, it seems like the problem is with software that processes XML, like a web crawler, not a browser. FTA:
The vast majority of these requests are from systems that are processing various types of markup (HTML, XML, XSLT, SVG) I don't claim to fully grasp what software is causing the problem but it does seem to effect more than just XML.
They are just about the only people who cannot be responsible for this. Exactly, for as long as I've been involved with HTML's various forms over the years it was always considered proper technique (from W3C documentation) to include the doctype (or more recently xmlns). Certainly sounds like a parser issue to me.
The only thing I'm unclear on is whether your average browser is contributing to this problem when parsing properly written documents.
..designed to scale to 1000 nodes, all commodity PCs... I'm just curious if anyone has had any experiance with these types of systems using commodity PCs, how is performance and does how well does it scale as you increase the amount of nodes?
Because they are students and are poor. Then tough break, it's going to take hard work to either A.) Pay for your own internet Access, or B.) To get out the vote to help elect a more citizen (not corporate) friendly government.
I don't see why students couldn't simply get some cheap wireless broadband and completely circumvent the schools IT infrastructure when it comes to P2P, if it comes down to it.
"We are disappointed with Intel's lack of response in resolving this matter, and while we were not anxious to use the courts to enforce our patent rights, we have no other recourse given our duty to protect the intellectual property of our inventors and the university." It also says that the patent was granted in '98, so I think they (WARF) were being pretty fair about things thus far.
Are these games and benchmarks actually making.. you know.. use of all the 8 cores? No they are not, the article goes on to say the 2nd processor is basically left unused and even current quad core designs are out performing skull trail.
The problem lies in the fact Intel released this platform as a gaming platform. However they reached into their workstation kit to pull out this hardware. Dual processors are a nice bragging right for enthusiasts, but only if the performance is in the very top tier with software actually in use. And using fully buffered memory, is simply a big no-no when it comes gaming rigs. On top of that, there are no BIOS options for overclocking, something any respectable board designed for even modest gaming comes with these days.
The article goes on to state that this is supposedly a review grade board, but has some serious stability issues and consumes far more electricity than the performance justifies.
AMD has faced a similar problem with its Quad FX line (aka 4x4). It's thermals were also way above the norm with dubious performance benefits as well. However at the time of it's release it was holding it's own (as best AMD can mangage these days) against the current Intel top offering. But just one look at the thermal images of a system built around AMD quad leaves you wondering if it's going to spontaneously burst into flames. However at least AMD had the sense to not implement FB-DIMM's in a gaming platform.
In short, it looks like a really half baked package for gaming enthusiasts, which might of worked if it had overclocking support, DDR3, didn't crash, and could outperform AMD and Intel's top quad core parts. It just leaves one wondering why? Intel is the current performance leader it makes no sense to release something like this to the reviewers.
Now I'm sure, at the very least, they've gone over their logs, looking at the capacity and actual usage, put it all into kick ass pie charts and crunched some numbers. They probably think usage will remain about the same or perhaps increase to an extent.
Now I'm not saying this isn't a potentially foolish move, but I will give them the benefit of the doubt and assume that they thought this out, to a degree.
On a side note, you bring up Comcast and Yahoo! Music... To very different beasts. How can you apply them to what Yahoo! is doing with hosting?
You can probably imagine what happened next. That sounds like suicide to me. Atleast I have the phyiscal stature to fight off 1 crazy right winger... But in the deep south? That's where the gold elites are to be found.
Make sure you get footage Funny you mention that, this past 4th of July we stopped by Wal-Mart to beer up and get supplies, I had my digital camera out, trying out various video capture settings to ensure I could get a couple hours worth of footage on the memory card I was using. Well within 5 minutes I had a guy in a red vest behind me, "Sir! Sir!... Sir!". I could hear him, but I didn't really care. Eventually he was up in my business telling me camera's were not allowed to be turned on on the premises. My first thought was, "Well what about cellphones genius, how can you tell the difference between a call being made and a picture being taken?"
Either way, I'd love to record my offensive behavior in Wal-Mart, helps to relieve the stress of standing in line for half an hour...
we would have a much more polite society and less crime as well. One man's crime is another man's freedom. For further reference please see, The War On Drugs(TM).
I've always felt that one should be able to say or write anything that suits their fancy. Short of something that could put someone in immediate harm (i.e. shouting, "Fire!" in a crowded place).
It's like when people put parts of Scientology's texts in public forums. To a true believer, those words are putting them in actual danger or at the very least greatly offending them. But no one cares about that, their a bunch of not jobs.
But in my own experiance, trying to get a t-shirt made that simply says F*** Jesus, has been very hard. And I can't wait to get one made to wear to Wal-Mart... Granted that will probably put me in physical danger, but that's part of the fun of it all.
The point is, the world is a dirty grubby place. And if you can't use your intellect to help you see beyond it all. That's you're problem, people talk shit. Always have always will. IMHO.
If they publish them, they are held to them. That's a valid point, however they always have a clause in there ToS in regards to customers affecting the quality of service for other users. And I'm fine with that.
My problem is when I first got my service (through CableOne in southwestern Idaho), I went a little hog wild. First time I had BT connections that were absolutely flying. I noticed that they seem to go on a 24 cycle, my downloads would be throttled and near midnight I was back up to speed.
Well once the novelty wore off (within about week). I kept my client throttled to 75k down, not much to ask for when I pay for a 3mb connection. However now I'm lucky to get anywhere above 50k. That's not fair, I'm taking steps to ensure I'm not a burden on the network. Yet I'm still being screwed. If I had more information, or if they had a policy (that they published) of greater use during off peak hours I could take appropriate actions. I don't feel it's out of the question to publish limits and throttle or block those users truly having a negative effect for other users as long as it's spelled out plainly and fairly in the ToS.
So... Comcast is saying that 5% of its customers aren't customers at all? It sure feels that way doesn't it? I just can't grasp why it's so hard to publish their transfer limits.
AmigaOS for safe browsing. Nahh it's even easier than that, just go back to a 28.8 modem. There's no way you wouldn't notice something going up or down on that connection.
Slashdot Mirror
that'd be fun, hijack a dns server and have all the requests directed to whatever project you have...
Look investors look! Look at all the hits we're getting! More money please!
There are alternatives to RIAA members. I am a big fan Epitaph/Hellcat records, and it seems really up in the air as to whether or not they are an RIAA member. Lord knows they don't exactly have bands signed that would put up with this nonsense. Anyways from Wikipeida: In mid-2005 Epitaph was added to the official list of RIAA members along with several other high-profile independent labels. The reason for the listing is not clear, but one source points to an agreement for internet P2P distribution ("Independent Labels Sign Deal With Snocap"). Another source claims label management joined RIAA in order to get certified sales awards (ie, official "Gold" or "Platinum" record status) for releases. This sparked some controversy as some feel they should no longer be labeled independent if they are a member of the RIAA.
However, the only source that has actually been used for these claims of membership is the official RIAA membership list, which has been disputed. As of this writing, not only is Epitaph listed as an official member, but Lookout! Records are once again listed, even though they were already falsely listed before.
Sorry that quote was a little long in the tooth, just wanted to clarify my point. And my point is, there are some pretty excellent alternatives to the big guns of the recording industry, as well as the fact that it would appear not everyone that deals with the RIAA is expressly condoning their behavior since they are in fact involved in the certification process of top selling records.. Granted Epitaph/Hellcat caters to a certain kind of music. The fact remains there are many smaller labels out there for everyone.
Seems like now, more than ever, would be a good time to support local artists and brick-and-mortar record stores that cater (however slight) to the independent and local music scenes. The Record Exchange - Boise, ID FTW
FTA:
The vast majority of these requests are from systems that are processing various types of markup (HTML, XML, XSLT, SVG)
I don't claim to fully grasp what software is causing the problem but it does seem to effect more than just XML.
The only thing I'm unclear on is whether your average browser is contributing to this problem when parsing properly written documents.
Yes, as a matter of fact I did read it. But I'm kind of curious as to people's first hand knowledge...
..designed to scale to 1000 nodes, all commodity PCs... I'm just curious if anyone has had any experiance with these types of systems using commodity PCs, how is performance and does how well does it scale as you increase the amount of nodes?I don't see why students couldn't simply get some cheap wireless broadband and completely circumvent the schools IT infrastructure when it comes to P2P, if it comes down to it.
Yeah blizzard uses a patcher that functions much like BitTorrent.
The problem lies in the fact Intel released this platform as a gaming platform. However they reached into their workstation kit to pull out this hardware. Dual processors are a nice bragging right for enthusiasts, but only if the performance is in the very top tier with software actually in use. And using fully buffered memory, is simply a big no-no when it comes gaming rigs. On top of that, there are no BIOS options for overclocking, something any respectable board designed for even modest gaming comes with these days.
The article goes on to state that this is supposedly a review grade board, but has some serious stability issues and consumes far more electricity than the performance justifies.
AMD has faced a similar problem with its Quad FX line (aka 4x4). It's thermals were also way above the norm with dubious performance benefits as well. However at the time of it's release it was holding it's own (as best AMD can mangage these days) against the current Intel top offering. But just one look at the thermal images of a system built around AMD quad leaves you wondering if it's going to spontaneously burst into flames. However at least AMD had the sense to not implement FB-DIMM's in a gaming platform.
In short, it looks like a really half baked package for gaming enthusiasts, which might of worked if it had overclocking support, DDR3, didn't crash, and could outperform AMD and Intel's top quad core parts. It just leaves one wondering why? Intel is the current performance leader it makes no sense to release something like this to the reviewers.
Now I'm sure, at the very least, they've gone over their logs, looking at the capacity and actual usage, put it all into kick ass pie charts and crunched some numbers. They probably think usage will remain about the same or perhaps increase to an extent.
Now I'm not saying this isn't a potentially foolish move, but I will give them the benefit of the doubt and assume that they thought this out, to a degree.
On a side note, you bring up Comcast and Yahoo! Music... To very different beasts. How can you apply them to what Yahoo! is doing with hosting?
Actually I want the asterisks in place as businesses tend to be privately owned, and I'm merely out to get a rise from the public. Not asked to leave.
Atleast I have the phyiscal stature to fight off 1 crazy right winger... But in the deep south? That's where the gold elites are to be found.
(outside of an instance that is)
Either way, I'd love to record my offensive behavior in Wal-Mart, helps to relieve the stress of standing in line for half an hour...
For further reference please see, The War On Drugs(TM).
Are those the terms used by the opposing legislators? Hahaha...
You sir, are a genius!
I've always felt that one should be able to say or write anything that suits their fancy. Short of something that could put someone in immediate harm (i.e. shouting, "Fire!" in a crowded place).
It's like when people put parts of Scientology's texts in public forums. To a true believer, those words are putting them in actual danger or at the very least greatly offending them. But no one cares about that, their a bunch of not jobs.
But in my own experiance, trying to get a t-shirt made that simply says F*** Jesus, has been very hard. And I can't wait to get one made to wear to Wal-Mart... Granted that will probably put me in physical danger, but that's part of the fun of it all.
The point is, the world is a dirty grubby place. And if you can't use your intellect to help you see beyond it all. That's you're problem, people talk shit. Always have always will. IMHO.
That's a valid point, however they always have a clause in there ToS in regards to customers affecting the quality of service for other users. And I'm fine with that.
My problem is when I first got my service (through CableOne in southwestern Idaho), I went a little hog wild. First time I had BT connections that were absolutely flying. I noticed that they seem to go on a 24 cycle, my downloads would be throttled and near midnight I was back up to speed.
Well once the novelty wore off (within about week). I kept my client throttled to 75k down, not much to ask for when I pay for a 3mb connection. However now I'm lucky to get anywhere above 50k. That's not fair, I'm taking steps to ensure I'm not a burden on the network. Yet I'm still being screwed. If I had more information, or if they had a policy (that they published) of greater use during off peak hours I could take appropriate actions. I don't feel it's out of the question to publish limits and throttle or block those users truly having a negative effect for other users as long as it's spelled out plainly and fairly in the ToS.
So does this mean we will soon of ornithopters to defend our spice from the evil Harkonnen?
It sure feels that way doesn't it? I just can't grasp why it's so hard to publish their transfer limits.
Nahh it's even easier than that, just go back to a 28.8 modem. There's no way you wouldn't notice something going up or down on that connection.