But RedHat is also available as a free download. Which one I get is my choice. If the record labels offered a choice, either pay $18 for the CD, or download the mp3 for free, then there would be no problem.
The only reason Redhat is available as a free download is because the authors of the software have given you the right to expect it for free via the GPL. If Linus had not GPLed Linux and most GNU tools were not Free (as in Beer and Speech) then you have no right to expect a free download.
Your argument basically boils down to I get stuff for free over here, so why don't I get everything for free? FOOD FOR THOUGHT
Working at a company where I have suggested Open Sourcing tools we use and been met with blank stares by superiors I understand his situation.
Unfortunately Justin works for Nullsoft which is owned by AOL which in turn is part of TimeWarner which is a member of the RIAA. It is simply impossible for AOL to let Nullsoft release the source for Gnutella. Considering that Justin probably signed standard industry paperwork when he signed at with AOL , it is very likely that AOL owns the code to Gnutella and decides what gets done to it.
Unless Justin wants an intense legal battle with a corporation with more money and lawyers than you can shake a stick at, he unfortunately has to give in to their demands. Before anyone chides for this "How many of you would risk losing your job and getting involved in an expensive legal battle simply to release source code to a program that can be reverse engineered by any enterprising hacker?"
All that it will take for opinion to turn against the free music crowd is for them to be seen as criminalistic freeloaders. Considering that a.) MP3.com has settled with most of the RIAA and will soon reopen it's My.mp3.com service (with paid options to offset the million$ in settlement options) b.) The major RIAA labels are all rushing to create flat rate music subscription services and c.) Napster will eventually need to make money to recoup all that VC funding and the according to Webnoize's survey over half of current Napster users would willingly pay $15 a month to use the service.
Eventually there will be several different ways to get music online and pay for it. Similar to the way that the MPAA fought VCRs and now there are many places we can rent videos. Currently people who watch movies for free (i.e. movie pirates, har har har) are considered freeloaders and criminals. It is not hard to conceive then that Gnutella users will become the w4rez d00ds of the music industry.
I was recently pointed to this by a fellow Slashdotter, it's ACE the The ADAPTIVE Communication Environment . It's an Object Oriented Networking Toolkit written in C++.
Even though the RIAA's lawsuits have helped boost Napster's popularity they claim that they will keep on fighting Napster to the bitter end. When asked if they would settle the response from an RIAA exec was ``Napster doesn't even have a business plan. There's really nothing they could offer us in settlement talks except a mailing list of people who want free music,' ". Read the story for yourself here.
Any so called legal alternative to Napster will face bitter opposition even if they are willing to pay the RIAA, just look at what's happened to MP3.com, they've shown that they'll pay an arm and a leg and yet only a few labels have settled with them.
David Boyes, a consultant who works with the S/390, managed to boot 41,500 Linux servers on one mainframe. Although he notes that you may not be able to run that many in real life.;) (if someone can find an actual link for this, please post it)
I've stopped participating in Slashdot MP3 debates because I've become tired of reading posts that cannot see the forest because of the trees in their way.
Basically, every post I've read simply boils down to exchanging a world where most artists are ripped off by record labels and some become rich to a world where artists are ripped off by fans and all of them stay broke. As long as Napster or something similar (i.e. free and easy to use) exists no online music distribution system will work.
REASONS:
Why would anyone go to a website and go through the trouble of registering and/or entering credit card information simply to buy a song for a $1 that they can download for free off Napster in a shorter time? Remember all it takes is 1 person to buy it for it to get on Napster
Why would anyone use a client that charged money per download when a free alternative exists?
Every encryption scheme can be broken given time.
PS: The problem is that Napster has now perpetuated the idea that music over the Internet should be free. Of course once home/car/personal MP3 players become cheap enough and popular enough this suddenly will mean that people will assume that all music should be free. Guess how many of today's artists would exist if there was no way to get a return of their investment of time and talent in their music?
Originally targeted as a Quake 1(!) killer, Tim Sweeney and Epic started this game during the times when 6 degrees of freedom was still cool. Do you want to talk about feature creep? How about 16 bpp textures, colored lighting, volumetric fog and halos? I seriously doubt any of those were even in design consideration in 1996. And didn't it set quite a few records in missed milestones? A four-year development cycle might as well be a few millenia for a game, I'm surprised (and glad) that they stuck it out.
According to Suck's logic, Unreal [s/Unreal/Daikatana/] should have been dead, buried and dirt by the time it's release date finally came out. But instead, it just sold {s/sold/wished it sold/] a couple of hundred thousand copies. Go figure.
If companies want to spy on this, that's their right; if we don't like them doing this, we simply don't have to give them any of our money.
Besides the fact that nobody has a right to spy on another, there are several problems with expecting industry self-regulation of privacy issues.
Technical Reasons: Don't get me wrong, I'm sensitive about privacy too, which is why I have doubleclick.net cookies blocked.
Besides the fact that it is impractical to expect every websurfer to memorize the privacy policy of every website they visit (even though this policies aren't worth the HTML their written in), many people do not have the technical savvy to block cookies and do selective filtering while others while find it too onerous. Why should people have to jump through technical hoops to stopping people from spying on them...are we at war?
Also Web Bugs can be used to track you without setting off cookie alarms. If you don't believe me see if this page sets off any cookie alarms in your browser. What is your technical response to this? Require everyone use Junkbuster to block all offsite images just so as to browse the web? Seems like that would make the average person go through a lot of trouble just so that companies doen't spy on them.
Criminal Reasons: But I'm even more uncomfortable with the idea of the government regulating what websites can and can't do.
But you are comfortable with anyone with forty bucks being able to track other people's addresses, phone numbers, date of birth, social security number, criminal record, credit history and more without regulation? Identity theft is already rather commonplace and it is now possible to get very detailed information about people with the scantiest information (phone number and name) and ruin them for life. I can do a reverse number lookup and get your address, do a lookup and find your birthday, look up your mortgage history, get your social security number and in essence become you. How many places identify people with a social security number and address/phone number combo?
Logical Reasons: It's no longer news that the dotcomm crash has occured and NASDAQ is now facing a bear market. Off course what this means is that several dotcomms that have spent million$ of VC dollars giving away free or reduced price products are now stuck between a rock and a hard place. Suddenly we have all these companies that have nothing of value to show investors except customer demographic information and eyeballs. Expecting these companies to respect the privacy of these eyeballs is asking the chicken to watch the henhouse. Sites that sell customer information or violate customers privacy in other ways (spam, spam, spam) are no longer the exception but the rule.
PS: You block doubleclick cookies but how many other companies have similar policies that you don't know about? How do you plan to deal with the fact that Netscape's browser tracks all your downloads or the Real fiasco? As long as it is not illegal companies will do everything and anything to violate our privacy. You cannot relying on the fact that some enterprising hacker finds some software spy because for every piece of spyware that is found there are many more undiscovered.
"Full disclosure is creating armies and armies of script kiddies," said Ranum, who called the creators of hacking tools "weapons dealers" who aren't really concerned with security.
The alternative to full disclosure is that security holes that exist will never be patched. MSFT has sat on security holes for months until pissed off hackers wrote exploits to show the holes in their software (e.g. Bubbleboy.). I personally have turned in Hotmail security holes that have never been fixed but would if I wrote an attention grabbing exploit.
I sympathize with security people who have to deal with 5cR1p7 k1DD3z who get their information from Bugtraq but even worse would be never having these security holes broadcast and instead having networks being brought down for unknown reasons. To my reckoning it is far better for both the good and bad guys to have information about holes instead of only the bad guys.
PS: The crack about security people going to security conferences during the day and writing cracking tools for 5cR1p7 k1DD3z is worrying though.
I've decided that I won't be buying any RIAA CDs for awhile personally (I've already cancelled a couple of orders, and I buy a ton of CDs) but decide for yourself.
Frankly I don't plan to stop buying CDs since I've always been opposed to Napster since all it is is a greedy VC funded company trying to make money of the work of others. Now on the other hand, even though Slashdot is well aware of the DeCSS fiasco, we are constantly bombarded with variousarticleson buying DVDs.
I'm not one to fault others for their personal decisions but if you plan to make a stand, make the right one. The more I people I see complaining about Napster the more it seems like all they care about is free music and not the issues of digital rights or the power of corporations. That seems to be the only explanation for dissing the RIAA but supporting an industry that uses Gestapo tactics to terrorize tenagers. Where are the grassroots efforts to boycott the MPAA?
My bad, wasn't trying to offend. When I originally posted this there were several highly moderated posts that were playing up the slashdot vs kuro5hin angle. Such as this one, this one and this one.
Since they've all been moderated down, my post seems weird out of context. There were also several sub-level posts that played this angle up but I don't have time to find links to all of them. Frankly, several people on K5 do try to play up the Slashdot vs. kuro5hin angle more than you do I simply remembered your name and that of fluffy grue. Probably because you both troll or have trolled slashdot.
But here's how I see it,/. is on hardcore equipment, and pays people to run it. If I ran a server (NT jokes aside) that was this unreliable I would be fired in about a week. How about the odd story that at least tells us what is going on.
When rusty first mentioned the DDoS attacks on kuro5hin, a lot of us suggested not giving the spammer coverage so as not to feed his ego, because we 'd seen how that made slashdot more of a target. I guess we were wrong and that didn't help. Of course, rusty and Inoshiro threatening to contact the law may have also pushed the spammer over the edge.
For the past year or so the childishness and plain illogical reasoning of the average slashdotter has been increasing at an alarming rate. Part of the reason I liked kuro5hin was because it was undiscovered by the likes of the empty blowhards, trolls and karma whores who have come to inhabit slashdot.
It is sad enough that one of the most interesting online discussions I've had in a while has been lost due to kuro5hin going down but now to see people cheapen the memory of the site in a CHEAP attempt to karma whore and seem deep is just too disgusting for words.
To all the idiots who think slashdot had something to do with this I'd like you to consider your words in this light...
Slashdot crashed them for having an open submission queue - So instead of implementing a similar feature (which would be trivial to code even to a Perl newbie like me) Slashdot's owners cracked a bunch of machines and engaged in a DDoS of kuro5hin just so as not to do this? Considering that anonymous postings to stories has brought us gems like the Beer guy and Penis Bird it is unlikely that Slashdot would open itself up for abuse and what has happened to kuro5hin shows that this wasn't a wrong conclusion
Slashdot crashed kuro5hin because it was getting popular - According to
Inoshiro the most traffic they've ever gotten was when they were mentioned in a slashdot headline. So slashdot DDoS's them just so they can give them two headlines and free VA Linux hardware. Yeah that makes sense.
Slashdot and kuro5hin were at war - the only people who believed this were the pathetic slashdot trolls like spiralx and fluffy grue(who wants DDoSed slashdot) who were always pushing the conspiracy theory edge.
Micheal has posted to kuro5hin several times and the other slashdot authors read it as well. CmdrTaco offered rusty help and gave advice on how to deal with the DDoS attempts several times. The only people who have ever believed they are at war are the small-minded people who can not like two things at once, who must always believe something has to be one "hip", "cool" or "in thing to do or like. These people have been spreading disinformation, malice and discord simply bnecause they have nothing beter to do with their time. They are quite similar to the "Redhat wants to be the Linux monopoly" idiots but only this time, they are posting their drivel at an innoportune moment.
Frankly this entire affair has deeply shaken my faith in human nature. There I was thinking that online I'd find a community of like-minded intellectuals who I could share and discuss ideas with that I couldn't find In Real Life. Instead one community turns out to be as full of petty, small-minded individuals as my hated highschool was while the other has probably been destroyed forever by some immature individual because his story on masturbation was rejected by the community.
I gotta go I've got a Physics test in an hour. I will say this though, if anyone wants to start another kuro5hin and needs an extra pair of hands mail me.
Why must people always try and sow malice and discord? Micheal posts to kuro5hin and lots of the Slashdot staff read it. When the DDoS attacks started rusty and crew were in touch with CmdrTaco who gave them several tips because they had been through the same thing.
To see worthless posts like yours that try to make a bad situation worse by creating animosity is highly distastefull.
According to ICQ's homepage they currently have over 72 million users. Last month C| Net claimed thatt AIM has 91 million users which may have changed since ICQ had 62 million at the time. All AOL has to do is make ICQ and AIM interoperate and any move by the remaining companies whose combined userbase dwarfs AIM's or ICQ's will be a waste of time.
Frankly I don't understand why people still hassle AOL, didn't they submit their Open IM Architecture Design to the IETF?
According to this story on E Online at Yahoo only 41,000 have downloaded the book so far (in 1 week). This is a far cry from the 400,000 copies downloaded for his eBook (in 1 day). An aid to Stephen King is quoted as saying "We didn't have the marketing and sales promotion that Simon & from the need for a big name publisher. Schuster put behind Riding the Bullet.".
Frankly I don't see why big publishing should fear this. If a world reknowned like Stephen King has only a few thousand dollars to look forward to from this endeavor then this is unlikely to suddenly liberate Joe UnknownAuthor from the need for a big name publisher.
I guess this goes to show that publishers are not as uneccessary and irrelevant as Stephen King thinks. Also when the novelty of this wears off who is to say that this isn't to become like shareware where even the authors of widely used software died broke and lonely?
PS: Then again I might be wrong and Stephen King will make more money from this than he does from publishing with big name authors but then again cosidering he made 84 million dollars in 1996 alone I somehow doubt this.
From what is a relational database: A relational database is a collection of data items organized as a set of formally-described tables from which data can be accessed or reassembled in many different ways without having to reorganize the database tables. The relational database was invented by E. F. Codd at IBM in 1970.
When creating a relational database, you can define the domain of possible values in a data column and further constraints that may apply to that data value.
From C.J. Drew's reviews of E.F. Codd's papers (because I can't find the original papers online): The 1970 paper also introduces the term foreign key. (Actually, the 1969 paper briefly mentions the concept too, but it doesn't use the term.) However, the definition is unnecessarily restrictive, in that -- for some reason -- it doesn't permit a primary key (or candidate key? or superkey?) to be a foreign key. The relational model as now understood includes no such restriction.
From the MySQL site to do list (2nd column): Full foreign key support. One probably wants to implement a procedural language first.
The only thing MySQL doesn't do is CHECK to make sure that the keys you use really exist in the table(s) you're referencing and it doesn't automatically delete rows from table with a foreign key definition. If you use your keys like normal, it'll work just fine!
Finally from the MySQL St andards Compatibility Page: Foreign keys make life very complicated, because the foreign key definitions must be stored in a database and implementing them would destroy the whole ``nice approach'' of using files that can be moved, copied and removed. The speed impact is terrible for INSERT and UPDATE statements, and in this case almost all FOREIGN KEY checks are useless because you usually insert records in the right tables in the right order, anyway. There is also a need to hold locks on many more tables when updating one table, because the side effects can cascade through the entire database. It's MUCH faster to delete records from one table first and subsequently delete them from the other tables. You can no longer restore a table by doing a full delete from the table and then restoring all records (from a new source or from a backup). If you have foreign keys you can't dump and restore tables unless you do so in a very specific order. It's very easy to do ``allowed'' circular definitions that make the tables impossible to recreate each table with a single create statement, even if the definition works and is usable.
In a nutshell, MySQL does not enforce relationships so how can it be a relational database?
I've searched the site for 10 minutes and have not been able to find anything so can someone please provide a link or answer how much it'll cost for a support license for DB that will be used by 20 to 30 employees who will all be accessing it over a local intranet via a web interface?
I am working on my final project for school which involves writing a project management application for a local business and unfortunately all the current RDBMS costs for Windows are in thousands of dollars (Oracle, SQL Server, DB2). We do not plan to support the software after the project is done so a support license is necessary.
PS: I didn't mention mySQL because it isn't an RDBMS. Read the definition of an RDBMS as well as that of a relational database or simply read C.J.Date's reviews of E.F. Codd's seminal 1970 work on relational DBs. Here's part two and part three of C.J. Date's work for anyone who's interested.
My $0.02 from my talks with pals who work at MSFT
on
The Myth Of The Borg
·
· Score: 5
I've mentioned this before but since it looks like this is a slashdot making peace with MSFT article I thought it would be relevant here. I have a few friends who work for the Visual Studio team and also know a few people from school who have worked there at one time or the other. Here are the realities I have noticed that counter (and may explain) the conspiracy theories about MSFT employees
1.) They believe they are always right. They also believe that they are on a mission to bring computing to the masses. When I say this, I don't mean a computer on every desktop but instead the elimination of all tasks that previously or currently need skilled computer help. A friend of mine waxes eloquently on when MSFT will render sysadmins and DBAs irrelevant thus enabling anyone without a CS degree or intensive computing background solve programming problems. Visual Basic, Access, FrontPage etc. are all steps in this direction.
2.) They believe they are always right. This leads to trivializing the need for compatibility or standards compliance when balanced against the request for features or functionality handed down by the higher ups. Instead of some acts being a Borg-like conspiracy (e.g. Kerberos, MSIE 5.5) many of them simply do not consider interoperability when making decisions on which direction their software will take. They do not set out willingly to break standards but simply happen to break them by virtue of the fact that standards are not important to them.
3.) They believe they are always right. This leads to the jack-of-all-trades mentality. Instead of doing a few things very well as most software houses usually do, they branch into every conceivable market and are increasingly more ambitious than the last. This leads to more of the current hodge podge of excellent products/ideas and brain dead products/ideas all residing under the same roof than at any other software house. Their good stuff is very good while their brain dead ideas are horrible.
Slashdot Mirror
But RedHat is also available as a free download. Which one I get is my choice. If the record labels offered a choice, either pay $18 for the CD, or download the mp3 for free, then there would be no problem.
The only reason Redhat is available as a free download is because the authors of the software have given you the right to expect it for free via the GPL. If Linus had not GPLed Linux and most GNU tools were not Free (as in Beer and Speech) then you have no right to expect a free download.
Your argument basically boils down to I get stuff for free over here, so why don't I get everything for free?
FOOD FOR THOUGHT
..or is there's no time displayed on the watch?
So instead of glancing at my watch to tell the time do I have to somehow call date on the command line?
FOOD FOR THOUGHT
Working at a company where I have suggested Open Sourcing tools we use and been met with blank stares by superiors I understand his situation.
Unfortunately Justin works for Nullsoft which is owned by AOL which in turn is part of TimeWarner which is a member of the RIAA. It is simply impossible for AOL to let Nullsoft release the source for Gnutella. Considering that Justin probably signed standard industry paperwork when he signed at with AOL , it is very likely that AOL owns the code to Gnutella and decides what gets done to it.
Unless Justin wants an intense legal battle with a corporation with more money and lawyers than you can shake a stick at, he unfortunately has to give in to their demands. Before anyone chides for this "How many of you would risk losing your job and getting involved in an expensive legal battle simply to release source code to a program that can be reverse engineered by any enterprising hacker?"
All that it will take for opinion to turn against the free music crowd is for them to be seen as criminalistic freeloaders. Considering that a.) MP3.com has settled with most of the RIAA and will soon reopen it's My.mp3.com service (with paid options to offset the million$ in settlement options) b.) The major RIAA labels are all rushing to create flat rate music subscription services and c.) Napster will eventually need to make money to recoup all that VC funding and the according to Webnoize's survey over half of current Napster users would willingly pay $15 a month to use the service.
Eventually there will be several different ways to get music online and pay for it. Similar to the way that the MPAA fought VCRs and now there are many places we can rent videos. Currently people who watch movies for free (i.e. movie pirates, har har har) are considered freeloaders and criminals. It is not hard to conceive then that Gnutella users will become the w4rez d00ds of the music industry.
TVT Records has sued Napster. According to their website they are one of the largest independent record labels in the U.S.
I was recently pointed to this by a fellow Slashdotter, it's ACE the The ADAPTIVE Communication Environment . It's an Object Oriented Networking Toolkit written in C++.
Even though the RIAA's lawsuits have helped boost Napster's popularity they claim that they will keep on fighting Napster to the bitter end. When asked if they would settle the response from an RIAA exec was ``Napster doesn't even have a business plan. There's really nothing they could offer us in settlement talks except a mailing list of people who want free music,' ". Read the story for yourself here.
Any so called legal alternative to Napster will face bitter opposition even if they are willing to pay the RIAA, just look at what's happened to MP3.com, they've shown that they'll pay an arm and a leg and yet only a few labels have settled with them.
David Boyes, a consultant who works with the S/390, managed to boot 41,500 Linux servers on one mainframe. Although he notes that you may not be able to run that many in real life. ;) (if someone can find an actual link for this, please post it)
The story on NetworkWorldFusion News
The story on Fairfax IT
A reprint of the story from LinuxPlanet
From a quick search on Google.
A listing of the major OS research projects involving distributed operating systems
Basically, every post I've read simply boils down to exchanging a world where most artists are ripped off by record labels and some become rich to a world where artists are ripped off by fans and all of them stay broke. As long as Napster or something similar (i.e. free and easy to use) exists no online music distribution system will work.
REASONS:
PS: The problem is that Napster has now perpetuated the idea that music over the Internet should be free. Of course once home/car/personal MP3 players become cheap enough and popular enough this suddenly will mean that people will assume that all music should be free. Guess how many of today's artists would exist if there was no way to get a return of their investment of time and talent in their music?
Originally targeted as a Quake 1(!) killer, Tim Sweeney and Epic started this game during the times when 6 degrees of freedom was still cool. Do you want to talk about feature creep? How about 16 bpp textures, colored lighting, volumetric fog and halos? I seriously doubt any of those were even in design consideration in 1996. And didn't it set quite a few records in missed milestones? A four-year development cycle might as well be a few millenia for a game, I'm surprised (and glad) that they stuck it out.
According to Suck's logic, Unreal [s/Unreal/Daikatana/] should have been dead, buried and dirt by the time it's release date finally came out. But instead, it just sold {s/sold/wished it sold/] a couple of hundred thousand copies. Go figure.
Daikatana
Edit your slashboxes
PS: Now please all of you quit bitching about anime stories.
If companies want to spy on this, that's their right; if we don't like them doing this, we simply don't have to give them any of our money.
Besides the fact that nobody has a right to spy on another, there are several problems with expecting industry self-regulation of privacy issues.
Technical Reasons:
Don't get me wrong, I'm sensitive about privacy too, which is why I have doubleclick.net cookies blocked.
Besides the fact that it is impractical to expect every websurfer to memorize the privacy policy of every website they visit (even though this policies aren't worth the HTML their written in), many people do not have the technical savvy to block cookies and do selective filtering while others while find it too onerous.
Why should people have to jump through technical hoops to stopping people from spying on them...are we at war?
Also Web Bugs can be used to track you without setting off cookie alarms. If you don't believe me see if this page sets off any cookie alarms in your browser. What is your technical response to this? Require everyone use Junkbuster to block all offsite images just so as to browse the web?
Seems like that would make the average person go through a lot of trouble just so that companies doen't spy on them.
Criminal Reasons:
But I'm even more uncomfortable with the idea of the government regulating what websites can and can't do.
But you are comfortable with anyone with forty bucks being able to track other people's addresses, phone numbers, date of birth, social security number, criminal record, credit history and more without regulation? Identity theft is already rather commonplace and it is now possible to get very detailed information about people with the scantiest information (phone number and name) and ruin them for life. I can do a reverse number lookup and get your address, do a lookup and find your birthday, look up your mortgage history, get your social security number and in essence become you. How many places identify people with a social security number and address/phone number combo?
Logical Reasons:
It's no longer news that the dotcomm crash has occured and NASDAQ is now facing a bear market. Off course what this means is that several dotcomms that have spent million$ of VC dollars giving away free or reduced price products are now stuck between a rock and a hard place. Suddenly we have all these companies that have nothing of value to show investors except customer demographic information and eyeballs. Expecting these companies to respect the privacy of these eyeballs is asking the chicken to watch the henhouse. Sites that sell customer information or violate customers privacy in other ways (spam, spam, spam) are no longer the exception but the rule.
PS: You block doubleclick cookies but how many other companies have similar policies that you don't know about? How do you plan to deal with the fact that Netscape's browser tracks all your downloads or the Real fiasco? As long as it is not illegal companies will do everything and anything to violate our privacy. You cannot relying on the fact that some enterprising hacker finds some software spy because for every piece of spyware that is found there are many more undiscovered.
"Full disclosure is creating armies and armies of script kiddies," said Ranum, who called the creators of hacking tools "weapons dealers" who aren't really concerned with security.
The alternative to full disclosure is that security holes that exist will never be patched. MSFT has sat on security holes for months until pissed off hackers wrote exploits to show the holes in their software (e.g. Bubbleboy.). I personally have turned in Hotmail security holes that have never been fixed but would if I wrote an attention grabbing exploit.
I sympathize with security people who have to deal with 5cR1p7 k1DD3z who get their information from Bugtraq but even worse would be never having these security holes broadcast and instead having networks being brought down for unknown reasons. To my reckoning it is far better for both the good and bad guys to have information about holes instead of only the bad guys.
PS: The crack about security people going to security conferences during the day and writing cracking tools for 5cR1p7 k1DD3z is worrying though.
I've decided that I won't be buying any RIAA CDs for awhile personally (I've already cancelled a couple of orders, and I buy a ton of CDs) but decide for yourself.
Frankly I don't plan to stop buying CDs since I've always been opposed to Napster since all it is is a greedy VC funded company trying to make money of the work of others. Now on the other hand, even though Slashdot is well aware of the DeCSS fiasco, we are constantly bombarded with various articles on buying DVDs.
I'm not one to fault others for their personal decisions but if you plan to make a stand, make the right one. The more I people I see complaining about Napster the more it seems like all they care about is free music and not the issues of digital rights or the power of corporations. That seems to be the only explanation for dissing the RIAA but supporting an industry that uses Gestapo tactics to terrorize tenagers. Where are the grassroots efforts to boycott the MPAA?
My bad, wasn't trying to offend. When I originally posted this there were several highly moderated posts that were playing up the slashdot vs kuro5hin angle. Such as this one, this one and this one.
Since they've all been moderated down, my post seems weird out of context. There were also several sub-level posts that played this angle up but I don't have time to find links to all of them. Frankly, several people on K5 do try to play up the Slashdot vs. kuro5hin angle more than you do I simply remembered your name and that of fluffy grue. Probably because you both troll or have trolled slashdot.
PS: I like Jon Erikkson, keep it up.
But here's how I see it, /. is on hardcore equipment, and pays people to run it. If I ran a server (NT jokes aside) that was this unreliable I would be fired in about a week.
How about the odd story that at least tells us what is going on.
Could it be because slashdot is tired of calling attention to the myriad DDoS attacks they get weekly?
When rusty first mentioned the DDoS attacks on kuro5hin, a lot of us suggested not giving the spammer coverage so as not to feed his ego, because we 'd seen how that made slashdot more of a target. I guess we were wrong and that didn't help. Of course, rusty and Inoshiro threatening to contact the law may have also pushed the spammer over the edge.
It is sad enough that one of the most interesting online discussions I've had in a while has been lost due to kuro5hin going down but now to see people cheapen the memory of the site in a CHEAP attempt to karma whore and seem deep is just too disgusting for words.
To all the idiots who think slashdot had something to do with this I'd like you to consider your words in this light...
- Slashdot and kuro5hin were at war - the only people who believed this were the pathetic slashdot trolls like spiralx and fluffy grue(who wants DDoSed slashdot) who were always pushing the conspiracy theory edge.
- Micheal has posted to kuro5hin several times and the other slashdot authors read it as well. CmdrTaco offered rusty help and gave advice on how to deal with the DDoS attempts several times. The only people who have ever believed they are at war are the small-minded people who can not like two things at once, who must always believe something has to be one "hip", "cool" or "in thing to do or like. These people have been spreading disinformation, malice and discord simply bnecause they have nothing beter to do with their time. They are quite similar to the "Redhat wants to be the Linux monopoly" idiots but only this time, they are posting their drivel at an innoportune moment.
Frankly this entire affair has deeply shaken my faith in human nature. There I was thinking that online I'd find a community of like-minded intellectuals who I could share and discuss ideas with that I couldn't find In Real Life. Instead one community turns out to be as full of petty, small-minded individuals as my hated highschool was while the other has probably been destroyed forever by some immature individual because his story on masturbation was rejected by the community.I gotta go I've got a Physics test in an hour. I will say this though, if anyone wants to start another kuro5hin and needs an extra pair of hands mail me.
Why must people always try and sow malice and discord? Micheal posts to kuro5hin and lots of the Slashdot staff read it. When the DDoS attacks started rusty and crew were in touch with CmdrTaco who gave them several tips because they had been through the same thing.
To see worthless posts like yours that try to make a bad situation worse by creating animosity is highly distastefull.
According to ICQ's homepage they currently have over 72 million users. Last month C| Net claimed thatt AIM has 91 million users which may have changed since ICQ had 62 million at the time. All AOL has to do is make ICQ and AIM interoperate and any move by the remaining companies whose combined userbase dwarfs AIM's or ICQ's will be a waste of time.
Frankly I don't understand why people still hassle AOL, didn't they submit their Open IM Architecture Design to the IETF?
According to this story on E Online at Yahoo only 41,000 have downloaded the book so far (in 1 week). This is a far cry from the 400,000 copies downloaded for his eBook (in 1 day). An aid to Stephen King is quoted as saying "We didn't have the marketing and sales promotion that Simon & from the need for a big name publisher. Schuster put behind Riding the Bullet.".
Frankly I don't see why big publishing should fear this. If a world reknowned like Stephen King has only a few thousand dollars to look forward to from this endeavor then this is unlikely to suddenly liberate Joe UnknownAuthor from the need for a big name publisher.
I guess this goes to show that publishers are not as uneccessary and irrelevant as Stephen King thinks. Also when the novelty of this wears off who is to say that this isn't to become like shareware where even the authors of widely used software died broke and lonely?
PS: Then again I might be wrong and Stephen King will make more money from this than he does from publishing with big name authors but then again cosidering he made 84 million dollars in 1996 alone I somehow doubt this.
A relational database is a collection of data items organized as a set of formally-described tables from which data can be accessed or reassembled in many different ways without having to reorganize the database tables. The relational database was invented by E. F. Codd at IBM in 1970.
When creating a relational database, you can define the domain of possible values in a data column and further constraints that may apply to that data value.
From C.J. Drew's reviews of E.F. Codd's papers (because I can't find the original papers online):
The 1970 paper also introduces the term foreign key. (Actually, the 1969 paper briefly mentions the concept too, but it doesn't use the term.) However, the definition is unnecessarily restrictive, in that -- for some reason -- it doesn't permit a primary key (or candidate key? or superkey?) to be a foreign key. The relational model as now understood includes no such restriction.
From the MySQL site to do list (2nd column):
Full foreign key support. One probably wants to implement a procedural language first.
From MySQL site Foreign keys example:
You don't need foreign keys to join 2 tables.
The only thing MySQL doesn't do is CHECK to make sure that the keys you use really exist in the table(s) you're referencing and it doesn't automatically delete rows from table with a foreign key definition. If you use your keys like normal, it'll work just fine!
Finally from the MySQL St andards Compatibility Page:
Foreign keys make life very complicated, because the foreign key definitions must be stored in a database and implementing them would destroy the whole ``nice approach'' of using files that can be moved, copied and removed.
The speed impact is terrible for INSERT and UPDATE statements, and in this case almost all FOREIGN KEY checks are useless because you usually insert records in the right tables in the right order, anyway.
There is also a need to hold locks on many more tables when updating one table, because the side effects can cascade through the entire database.
It's MUCH faster to delete records from one table first and subsequently delete them from the other tables.
You can no longer restore a table by doing a full delete from the table and then restoring all records (from a new source or from a backup).
If you have foreign keys you can't dump and restore tables unless you do so in a very specific order.
It's very easy to do ``allowed'' circular definitions that make the tables impossible to recreate each table with a single create statement, even if the definition works and is usable.
In a nutshell, MySQL does not enforce relationships so how can it be a relational database?
I've searched the site for 10 minutes and have not been able to find anything so can someone please provide a link or answer how much it'll cost for a support license for DB that will be used by 20 to 30 employees who will all be accessing it over a local intranet via a web interface?
I am working on my final project for school which involves writing a project management application for a local business and unfortunately all the current RDBMS costs for Windows are in thousands of dollars (Oracle, SQL Server, DB2). We do not plan to support the software after the project is done so a support license is necessary.
PS: I didn't mention mySQL because it isn't an RDBMS. Read the definition of an RDBMS as well as that of a relational database or simply read C.J.Date's reviews of E.F. Codd's seminal 1970 work on relational DBs. Here's part two and part three of C.J. Date's work for anyone who's interested.
I've mentioned this before but since it looks like this is a slashdot making peace with MSFT article I thought it would be relevant here. I have a few friends who work for the Visual Studio team and also know a few people from school who have worked there at one time or the other. Here are the realities I have noticed that counter (and may explain) the conspiracy theories about MSFT employees
1.) They believe they are always right. They also believe that they are on a mission to bring computing to the masses. When I say this, I don't mean a computer on every desktop but instead the elimination of all tasks that previously or currently need skilled computer help. A friend of mine waxes eloquently on when MSFT will render sysadmins and DBAs irrelevant thus enabling anyone without a CS degree or intensive computing background solve programming problems. Visual Basic, Access, FrontPage etc. are all steps in this direction.
2.) They believe they are always right. This leads to trivializing the need for compatibility or standards compliance when balanced against the request for features or functionality handed down by the higher ups. Instead of some acts being a Borg-like conspiracy (e.g. Kerberos, MSIE 5.5) many of them simply do not consider interoperability when making decisions on which direction their software will take. They do not set out willingly to break standards but simply happen to break them by virtue of the fact that standards are not important to them.
3.) They believe they are always right. This leads to the jack-of-all-trades mentality. Instead of doing a few things very well as most software houses usually do, they branch into every conceivable market and are increasingly more ambitious than the last. This leads to more of the current hodge podge of excellent products/ideas and brain dead products/ideas all residing under the same roof than at any other software house. Their good stuff is very good while their brain dead ideas are horrible.
I meant how many Wiccans or Satanists not are.
I need to use the preview button more often. *embarassed grin*