But I wonder what my brother's new excuse will be.
He's been wearing the debian "what your mother would use if it was 20 times easier" t-shirt for a while, and has always used the upcoming release of 2.2 as an excuse for why *he* isn't using it.
I can just guess... "But the 2.4 kernel is going to be out soon, I can't install a debian while I'm waiting for that!"
Doubleclick keeps track of IP addresses. If their computers see someone connecting from random IP addresses all over IPv4-space (ie, not from within a pool of modems belonging to a single ISP), they will mark that "user" as bogus.
There is absolutely no difference between playing cookie-exchange and simply disabling doubleclick cookies.
Rob, sorry dude but its time to dump AC, it'll hopefully kick some life back into this otherwise quickly dying site
I don't think that would help. All it would do is make the people posting noise (it isn't really intelligent enough to be called trolling after all) create accounts. And if they have to, they will create a new account for every post.
Short of requiring a credit card and charging it $1 for every point of negative karma the user obtains, I don't think there is any solution.
Come on, it isn't that hard. Send the track encoded with RC5 (or your favorite block cipher), and only after the recipient has acknowledged receipt of the entire track and paid for it, send the decryption key.
Ask yourself this question: *How does Napster stop the copying of copyrighted music over its servers without shutting down entirely?*
Dear RIAA, We would like to comply with your request to stop distributing copyrighted music, but are unable to readily identify which songs should not be distributed. Please send us a list of artists and songs which you would like blocked. It should be quite easy to provide such a list, as you keep track of said information already for your own purposes.
I don't understand why the court granted this stay.
Napster claims that the injunction would have put them out of business. The injunction did not state that Napster had to shut down, merely that it had to stop helping people copy copyrighted music.
Further, the court asked RIAA to post a 5 million dollar bond to cover any losses suffered by Napster as a result of the injunction if Napster ended up winning the case. How likely is it that temporarily shutting Napster down would cost the company more than 5 million dollars?
What reason did the court have for staying this injunction?
As someone else has already pointed out, however, we are almost done -- 99.89% done last time I checked -- and we don't need any more computers right now (in fact, many computers are idling because the server can't find any work to assign them).
We have one of the largest collections of computer geeks on earth right here. I'm sure that if we all put our minds to it we could shut down 99% of the US internet hosts.
"I'm working for a start-up that looks like it's about to fold. Can anyone point me to some resources for finding charitable organizations that need computer work, anywhere in the world?"
I'd say that you're doing charitable work right now. After all, isn't charitable work when you work your *** off, and don't get paid anything at the end?
A specific grid cell needs to know about the pressure forces that it is feeling from all of the other cells right next to it. But it also needs to know about the gravitational field generated by parts that might be on the other side of the star.
The local forces are dealt with easily by using overlapping blocks; the solution to the latency problem for long-distance forces falls out of the multipole method (you were using the multipole method, right?),
When reading the article, it occured to me that massively distributed projects can only be really effective for tasks that don't require low latency.
What sort of real supercomputing problem requires low latency?
Linpack needs low latency (finding each pivot requries a vertical broadcast) -- but there are other ways of solving the same problem without requiring low latency. Similarly a naive physical simulation where each CPU has to transfer boundary data each timestep requires low latency, but with a less naive approach the latency issue can be avoided here as well.
What you can't generally do by tricks like this is reduce the need for bandwidth... but given Gilder's law (bandwidth increases by a factor of three each year), bandwidth is soon going to be of negligable cost compared with cpu cycles.
states that bandwidth increases by a factor of three every year. This means doubling every 7-8 months.
This, compared with Moore's law, has interesting consequences; among them the fact that as time goes to infinity processing power is expensive, while bandwidth is cheap. This is reflected in the differences between IPv4 and IPv6: while IPv4 has data fields tightly packed together, IPv6 spaces them out in a manner designed for easy access by software. While IPv4 optimizes bandwidth, IPv6 optimizes computational power.
Strike 2: fake numbers. "as memory comprises 40 to 70 percent of the cost of most NT-based server configurations" Er, gee, not only is that an absurdly large error margin, but most servers cost, oh, we'll say $2000 and up. 40% of is $800. $800 of PC133 right now is about 640MB of RAM. Most systems in that price range have 256-384. Oops.
It isn't an NT server, but a 128 processor Beowulf was recently built at the university of British Columbia, and memory comprised 44% of the total cost.
After all, *my brain* contains detailed personal information on people who have not explicitly given my permission to carry that information into another country.
Seriously, what is the difference between transporting information across borders on a palm pilot and transporting it inside someone's head, apart from the fact that people have much more memory than palm pilots?
Try that when people are behind a corporate firewall/proxy that eats the referer.
Yes, but there will be enough people who aren't behind firewalls that you can pick out all the important incoming links anyway. You only need one person to trasverse an incoming link without a referer-eater in order to get the link source into your logs.
10.13 Referer
The Referer request-header field allows the client to specify, for the server's benefit, the address (URI) of the resource from which the Request-URI was obtained. This allows a server to generate lists of back-links to resources for interest, logging, optimized caching, etc. It also allows obsolete or mistyped links to be traced for maintenance. The Referer field must not be sent if the Request-URI was obtained from a source that does not have its own URI, such as input from the user keyboard.
If you want to make sure that you don't break any links when you move your website, all you have to do is consult your HTTP logs, pull out all the lines starting "Referer:", and remove the duplicates.
If the intended recipients can access the controversial material, then the government/lowyers/RIAA/[insert bad guys here] can also access it.
All they have to do at that point is go to court and present both "halves" of the material, and demonstrate that they combine to equal whatever [bad guys] don't like.
What do you claim at that point? "Um, it is just a coincidence that those two files of white noise xor to give you instructions on building nukes... really!"
Good --> New, New --> Anti-establishment, Good --> Popular. Ergo all good things will be both condemned by the establishment and made popular by the masses.
This does not imply that all things anti-establishment become popular. Cannibalism and incest are two obvious examples of things which are clearly frowned upon by the establishment, but which are not (at present) very popular.
ICANN should create.rog,.ogr,.cmo, and similar TLDs, and alias them to the obvious. It would save so much time. ... especially when I type slashdot.rog into lynx and it looks up slashdot.rog.edu, slashdot.rog.com, and slashdot.rog.net as well.
For all I know, they've deemed the Los Alamos cafeteria schedule classified because it might be used to help poison some foolhardy scientist in ten years.
Nope. The Los Alamos cafeteria schedule is in fact available on the web for the entire world to see at http://www.lanl.gov/labview/services/CafeteriaMe nu/menu.htm.
Slashdot Mirror
But I wonder what my brother's new excuse will be.
He's been wearing the debian "what your mother would use if it was 20 times easier" t-shirt for a while, and has always used the upcoming release of 2.2 as an excuse for why *he* isn't using it.
I can just guess... "But the 2.4 kernel is going to be out soon, I can't install a debian while I'm waiting for that!"
Doubleclick keeps track of IP addresses. If their computers see someone connecting from random IP addresses all over IPv4-space (ie, not from within a pool of modems belonging to a single ISP), they will mark that "user" as bogus.
There is absolutely no difference between playing cookie-exchange and simply disabling doubleclick cookies.
Slashdot already reported...
Yep, they did. About 0 minutes ago.
Rob, sorry dude but its time to dump AC, it'll hopefully kick some life back into this otherwise quickly dying site
I don't think that would help. All it would do is make the people posting noise (it isn't really intelligent enough to be called trolling after all) create accounts. And if they have to, they will create a new account for every post.
Short of requiring a credit card and charging it $1 for every point of negative karma the user obtains, I don't think there is any solution.
Come on, it isn't that hard. Send the track encoded with RC5 (or your favorite block cipher), and only after the recipient has acknowledged receipt of the entire track and paid for it, send the decryption key.
stop the copying of copyrighted music over its
servers without shutting down entirely?*
Gee, that wasn't hard, was it?
I don't understand why the court granted this stay.
Napster claims that the injunction would have put them out of business. The injunction did not state that Napster had to shut down, merely that it had to stop helping people copy copyrighted music.
Further, the court asked RIAA to post a 5 million dollar bond to cover any losses suffered by Napster as a result of the injunction if Napster ended up winning the case. How likely is it that temporarily shutting Napster down would cost the company more than 5 million dollars?
What reason did the court have for staying this injunction?
Thanks for the advertisment ;)
/.
As someone else has already pointed out, however, we are almost done -- 99.89% done last time I checked -- and we don't need any more computers right now (in fact, many computers are idling because the server can't find any work to assign them).
Hopefully when we finish the news will get onto
They have already found that these bacteria survive gamma rays and a hard vacuum in their lab.
Why should gamma rays and a hard vacuum be any more difficult to survive if it is in space?
We have one of the largest collections of computer geeks on earth right here. I'm sure that if we all put our minds to it we could shut down 99% of the US internet hosts.
I mean, it's in the cause of science, right?
... they can come and ask for it. As soon as I am presented with a court order to hand over my email, I'll hand it over.
Until then, I'll just hope that they can't factor 4096 bit numbers.
but do they still deliver in 30 minutes?
"I'm working for a start-up that looks like it's about to fold. Can anyone point me to some resources for finding charitable organizations that need computer work, anywhere in the world?"
I'd say that you're doing charitable work right now. After all, isn't charitable work when you work your *** off, and don't get paid anything at the end?
A specific grid cell needs to know about the pressure forces that it is feeling from all of the other cells right next to it. But it also needs to know about the gravitational field generated by parts that might be on the other side of the star.
The local forces are dealt with easily by using overlapping blocks; the solution to the latency problem for long-distance forces falls out of the multipole method (you were using the multipole method, right?),
What's the problem?
When reading the article, it occured to me that massively distributed projects can only be really effective for tasks that don't require low latency.
What sort of real supercomputing problem requires low latency?
Linpack needs low latency (finding each pivot requries a vertical broadcast) -- but there are other ways of solving the same problem without requiring low latency. Similarly a naive physical simulation where each CPU has to transfer boundary data each timestep requires low latency, but with a less naive approach the latency issue can be avoided here as well.
What you can't generally do by tricks like this is reduce the need for bandwidth... but given Gilder's law (bandwidth increases by a factor of three each year), bandwidth is soon going to be of negligable cost compared with cpu cycles.
I can't help but wonder who'll be first to get stuck with 029A:7734:029A:7734...
Well, 0x029A = 666. so I see where that comes from... but where the fsck does 7734 come from?
states that bandwidth increases by a factor of three every year. This means doubling every 7-8 months.
This, compared with Moore's law, has interesting consequences; among them the fact that as time goes to infinity processing power is expensive, while bandwidth is cheap. This is reflected in the differences between IPv4 and IPv6: while IPv4 has data fields tightly packed together, IPv6 spaces them out in a manner designed for easy access by software. While IPv4 optimizes bandwidth, IPv6 optimizes computational power.
Strike 2: fake numbers. "as memory comprises 40 to 70 percent of the cost of most NT-based server configurations" Er, gee, not only is that an absurdly large error margin, but most servers cost, oh, we'll say $2000 and up. 40% of is $800. $800 of PC133 right now is about 640MB of RAM. Most systems in that price range have 256-384. Oops.
It isn't an NT server, but a 128 processor Beowulf was recently built at the university of British Columbia, and memory comprised 44% of the total cost.
I don't think that 40-70% is unreasonable at all.
After all, *my brain* contains detailed personal information on people who have not explicitly given my permission to carry that information into another country.
Seriously, what is the difference between transporting information across borders on a palm pilot and transporting it inside someone's head, apart from the fact that people have much more memory than palm pilots?
Try that when people are behind a corporate firewall/proxy that eats the referer.
Yes, but there will be enough people who aren't behind firewalls that you can pick out all the important incoming links anyway. You only need one person to trasverse an incoming link without a referer-eater in order to get the link source into your logs.
If you want to make sure that you don't break any links when you move your website, all you have to do is consult your HTTP logs, pull out all the lines starting "Referer:", and remove the duplicates.
If the intended recipients can access the controversial material, then the government/lowyers/RIAA/[insert bad guys here] can also access it.
All they have to do at that point is go to court and present both "halves" of the material, and demonstrate that they combine to equal whatever [bad guys] don't like.
What do you claim at that point? "Um, it is just a coincidence that those two files of white noise xor to give you instructions on building nukes... really!"
Somehow I don't think that you would be believed.
Good --> New, New --> Anti-establishment, Good --> Popular. Ergo all good things will be both condemned by the establishment and made popular by the masses.
This does not imply that all things anti-establishment become popular. Cannibalism and incest are two obvious examples of things which are clearly frowned upon by the establishment, but which are not (at present) very popular.
ICANN should create .rog, .ogr, .cmo, and similar TLDs, and alias them to the obvious. It would save so much time.
... especially when I type slashdot.rog into lynx and it looks up slashdot.rog.edu, slashdot.rog.com, and slashdot.rog.net as well.
For all I know, they've deemed the Los Alamos cafeteria schedule classified because it might be used to help poison some foolhardy scientist in ten years.
e nu/menu.htm.
Nope. The Los Alamos cafeteria schedule is in fact available on the web for the entire world to see at
http://www.lanl.gov/labview/services/CafeteriaM