Dijkstra was very good at producing quotable remarks; in addition to his comment about computers, thought, submarines, and swimming (RTFA), he made the following remark about computer science: "Computer science is as much about computers as astronomy is about telescopes."
Is this an undergraduate only college? While it might be possible for undergraduates to use digitized versions of their textbooks, it won't be possible for anyone to do much research; it is inevitably necessary to look up research papers, and anything earlier than 1990 is not likely to be available in digital form.
they do write all eight heads at once, don't they?
Nope. Actually there were some drives which did this a long time ago, but nothing recently.
The difficulty is that the platters expand due to heat, so it isn't possible to follow "parallel" tracks on different platters unless you put a separate actuator onto each arm; at that point, you've duplicated so much electronics that you might as well just get a second drive.
Yes, but what voltage would the DC power run at? All of these different devices tend to need different voltages. I seem to recall that changing DC voltages was rather harder than with AC -- I mean, that's why the power grid runs in AC, right?
If you look at the parent author's posting history, you'll see that he is nothing more than a troll who fools people into thinking that he is Theo. (Incidentally, the name is "Theo de Raadt", not "Theo DeRaadt".)
ECN is still only a proposed standard. Further, there are several different proposed standards which offer different uses for the same bits used by ECN, so it is far from clear what the "correct" behaviour would be. Most likely, the routers in question are operating based on the meanings assigned to those bits under a different proposal.
Correction: ECN is a proposed standard. A step up from experimental (a step which occured long after ECN was introduced into the linux kernel, BTW), but still a long way from actually being a standard.
I know that laches has, thus far, been restricted to barring past damages, but I don't see why this is always going to be the case. Past cases have dealt with circumstances where the infringer was (or should have been) aware that he was, in fact, infringing upon the patent; the situation is much different where a large investment has been made (say, building a factory) without knowledge of the patent.
If you wait for someone to build a factory before you bring out your patent, you are certainly prejudicing the case, since the existance of such an investment makes it much harder for them to avoid infringing upon your patent in the future.
Any lawyers reading this? I'm rather confused. What happened to the idea of estoppel by laches? To quote, "the legal doctrine that a legal right or claim will not be enforced or allowed if a long delay in asserting the right or claim has prejudiced the adverse party".
Surely waiting fifteen years before asserting a patent (and allowing infringing practices to become commonplace) is a perfect example of this?
This "steganography tool" is no more than snake oil.
Rather than using a more advanced method of steganography, this tool packs data into the least significant bits of the image. Simple, easy, and incredibly obvious. This is to steganography what ROT13 is to encryption -- if you use it for anything important, people will laugh at you.
In fact, this is the worst kind of snake oil, because it is not only ineffective, but also dangerous. The administrators of the Great Firewall Of China (for example) could very easily detect files encoded with this software; using it would then be akin to waving a red flag and shouting "hey, I'm doing something I don't want you to know about". Bad steganography is worse than no steganography, because it highlights the fact that you're trying to hide something.
If I was switching to a new operating system, I'd try it out for a while -- that is, more than a year -- before I moved my entire job over to depending on it. So if he's only been trying it for a year, I would have expected that his books would still be written on some other system.
I know about Moore's law but I also know that 10 Gbit throughput on my hard disk is not coming soon.
True, but drives which are faster than 1 Gbps will be around a few years from now (current speeds are around 400-500 Mbps), and RAID arrays can already put out several Gbps.
It will indeed be a while before people commonly saturate 10Gbps ethernet, but when the technology progresses by factor-of-ten steps, that's rather inevitable.
The entire concept, sine*, cosine, tangent, etc., was invented during the Middle Ages (by Arabs like Abu al-Wafa and Abu Nasr Mansur).... who then sent their work back in time to roughly 1900BC, in order that the Babylonians could inscribe a table of secants into Plimpton 322.
Unless I'm missing something, if I want to defame someone in the US now, all I have to do is upload the material to a web site, and wait 12 months before I give anyone a link to it.
The situation on the web is rather different from with traditional publishing, since it is much easier for web pages to be "published" well in advance of when any significant number of people see them.
If there is to be a 12 month statute of limitations, I think that the window should begin *when the plaintiff becomes aware of the material*, not when it was actually published.
When I opened up an article which discussed, among other things, inkjet printer cartridges which were designed to fail if they were refilled, I found a popup ad telling me that I could save 80% off my inkjet cartridges by refilling them.
Surely you mean "One Kernel, under Linus, indivisible." (Except that it isn't really, but we shouldn't let minor facts get in the way.) After all, the OS is more than just a kernel, and the kernel pretty much all Linus is involved with.
As Euclid said, "there is no royal road to mathematics". Go to university, take the courses they tell you to take, and expect to spend a lot of time and money.
Either that, or don't bother. Quite seriously, I doubt you'll be able to learn much whatever you do -- mathematics is a subject which people find incredibly hard to pick up late in life.
Slashdot Mirror
Dijkstra was very good at producing quotable remarks; in addition to his comment about computers, thought, submarines, and swimming (RTFA), he made the following remark about computer science:
"Computer science is as much about computers as astronomy is about telescopes."
use a pipe. Oh wait, thats only available in linux...
Err, pipes have been in Windows since NT 3.1, in August '93.
Is this an undergraduate only college? While it might be possible for undergraduates to use digitized versions of their textbooks, it won't be possible for anyone to do much research; it is inevitably necessary to look up research papers, and anything earlier than 1990 is not likely to be available in digital form.
This "vulnerability" only effects poorly-written applications, running with system priviledges, which create windows in user-space.
You're not supposed to do that.
If you want to have a service which is user-configurable, create two separate programs (one service & one gui) and communicate via a named pipe.
This isn't a flaw in the win32 API. This is a flaw in some applications which run under windows.
they do write all eight heads at once, don't they?
Nope. Actually there were some drives which did this a long time ago, but nothing recently.
The difficulty is that the platters expand due to heat, so it isn't possible to follow "parallel" tracks on different platters unless you put a separate actuator onto each arm; at that point, you've duplicated so much electronics that you might as well just get a second drive.
Yes, but what voltage would the DC power run at? All of these different devices tend to need different voltages. I seem to recall that changing DC voltages was rather harder than with AC -- I mean, that's why the power grid runs in AC, right?
If you look at the parent author's posting history, you'll see that he is nothing more than a troll who fools people into thinking that he is Theo. (Incidentally, the name is "Theo de Raadt", not "Theo DeRaadt".)
Please mod the parent into oblivion.
ECN is still only a proposed standard. Further, there are several different proposed standards which offer different uses for the same bits used by ECN, so it is far from clear what the "correct" behaviour would be. Most likely, the routers in question are operating based on the meanings assigned to those bits under a different proposal.
ECN is a standard -- RFC 3168.
Correction: ECN is a proposed standard. A step up from experimental (a step which occured long after ECN was introduced into the linux kernel, BTW), but still a long way from actually being a standard.
That's what you get for using EXPERIMENTAL, non-STANDARD protocols.
Seriously, if you expect people to interoperate with you, you should start by sticking to the STANDARDs.
I know that laches has, thus far, been restricted to barring past damages, but I don't see why this is always going to be the case. Past cases have dealt with circumstances where the infringer was (or should have been) aware that he was, in fact, infringing upon the patent; the situation is much different where a large investment has been made (say, building a factory) without knowledge of the patent.
If you wait for someone to build a factory before you bring out your patent, you are certainly prejudicing the case, since the existance of such an investment makes it much harder for them to avoid infringing upon your patent in the future.
Any lawyers reading this? I'm rather confused. What happened to the idea of estoppel by laches? To quote, "the legal doctrine that a legal right or claim will not be enforced or allowed if a long delay in asserting the right or claim has prejudiced the adverse party".
Surely waiting fifteen years before asserting a patent (and allowing infringing practices to become commonplace) is a perfect example of this?
This "steganography tool" is no more than snake oil.
Rather than using a more advanced method of steganography, this tool packs data into the least significant bits of the image. Simple, easy, and incredibly obvious. This is to steganography what ROT13 is to encryption -- if you use it for anything important, people will laugh at you.
In fact, this is the worst kind of snake oil, because it is not only ineffective, but also dangerous. The administrators of the Great Firewall Of China (for example) could very easily detect files encoded with this software; using it would then be akin to waving a red flag and shouting "hey, I'm doing something I don't want you to know about". Bad steganography is worse than no steganography, because it highlights the fact that you're trying to hide something.
Can someone explain where the fax-something-unique-to-8889771577 bit comes in? I can't see any connection to any of the stories.
Ever see a fat carnivore?
Ever see a male, neutered, housecat?
The submission said Linux and Star Office 5.2
If I was switching to a new operating system, I'd try it out for a while -- that is, more than a year -- before I moved my entire job over to depending on it. So if he's only been trying it for a year, I would have expected that his books would still be written on some other system.
What sort of computer do you use to write your books? And what operating system does it run?
I know about Moore's law but I also know that 10 Gbit throughput on my hard disk is not coming soon.
True, but drives which are faster than 1 Gbps will be around a few years from now (current speeds are around 400-500 Mbps), and RAID arrays can already put out several Gbps.
It will indeed be a while before people commonly saturate 10Gbps ethernet, but when the technology progresses by factor-of-ten steps, that's rather inevitable.
... if they're not in the US. Journals take submissions from all around the world, and many authors are not living under repressive regimes.
The entire concept, sine*, cosine, tangent, etc., was invented during the Middle Ages (by Arabs like Abu al-Wafa and Abu Nasr Mansur). ... who then sent their work back in time to roughly 1900BC, in order that the Babylonians could inscribe a table of secants into Plimpton 322.
Unless I'm missing something, if I want to defame someone in the US now, all I have to do is upload the material to a web site, and wait 12 months before I give anyone a link to it.
The situation on the web is rather different from with traditional publishing, since it is much easier for web pages to be "published" well in advance of when any significant number of people see them.
If there is to be a 12 month statute of limitations, I think that the window should begin *when the plaintiff becomes aware of the material*, not when it was actually published.
When I opened up an article which discussed, among other things, inkjet printer cartridges which were designed to fail if they were refilled, I found a popup ad telling me that I could save 80% off my inkjet cartridges by refilling them.
Surely you mean "One Kernel, under Linus, indivisible." (Except that it isn't really, but we shouldn't let minor facts get in the way.) After all, the OS is more than just a kernel, and the kernel pretty much all Linus is involved with.
Thus spake the AC: Actually, it was, "There is no royal road to geometry."
That is the common translation, but you have to remember the context; in Euclid's time, "mathematics" and "geometry" meant the same thing.
The situation is similar with "arts" and "sciences" -- until a few centuries ago, the two words were used interchangeably.
As Euclid said, "there is no royal road to mathematics". Go to university, take the courses they tell you to take, and expect to spend a lot of time and money.
Either that, or don't bother. Quite seriously, I doubt you'll be able to learn much whatever you do -- mathematics is a subject which people find incredibly hard to pick up late in life.