I get a bit annoyed (OK, sometimes REALLY annoyed) at people in the Linux world equating the use of Linux and being an OSS zealot.
Personally, I don't give a rat's ass. If Linux does the job I want it to, better or cheaper than someone else, then I'll use it. If I want to use it, I'll use it. I am not, however, going to town banging on doors and windows about GPL, OSS, and the purity of my morals. If someone else wants to, that's fine. Just don't ruin it for the rest of us. (i.e. by discouraging companies who make good hardware from supporting Linux at all.)
Your post doesn't make me think that you're one of these, but it was a good segue to my point.
As for the car analogy, it brings up the question of compromise. To wit: I live in an area where I can't do without a car, so I had to buy one. I did, however, put fuel efficiency and reliability near the top of my 'important features' list, to cut down on the environmental costs. Furthermore - because I can, I take the bus to work.
Edison invented SOME of the things he patented. He didn't invent the lightbulb, for instance. (it was argued at the time that he was unaware of Swann's work, but that's been effectively proven false.) He DID take out some patents for the sole purpose of suing people. He also created a company that heavily sponsored group activities (box socials, dances, etc.) but also worked them ferociously hard. He was a perfect example of capitalism unrestrained, none of which really affects my original point: He and many others have abused the patent system towards their own ends as long as it has existed.
Something that people don't seem to realise (not just on/., but in the world in general) is that the patent system has been abused for centuries. Eli Whitney spent decades in the courts, trying to prevent people from making and selling ripoffs of his (patented) cotton gin, and by the time he won, the patent was only valid for one more year. Edison, in contrast, patented everything under the sun and sued people black and blue over trivial or non-existent issues.
The point is that the patent system has been open to abuse as long as it's been around, and it's not likely to change in the next two years or so, as most seem here seem to think. Even if the abuses are so flagrantly worse now than ever before that it really is going to collapse, there's a LOT of momentum, and it's going to take a decade or more.
So push it hard, but don't expect to see much movement for a while.
He didn't say ditch the stuff already made, he said ditch the units. You should have quit using them decades ago like the rest of the world, and by now you wouldn't have any problems. However, start making the switch NOW, instead of complaining about how hard it will be and how long it will take.
When your water pump dies, get one that measures pressure in kPa. Computer case dimensions are neither particularly important, or likely to be manufactured in Imperial units anyways. I'll be that they've all been made metric, and measured in inches for the US market. At least the ones made overseas (which is nearly all of them).
The point is, start changing now! Come join the rest of the world!
Actually, nothing outside the US is in meters or liters. The official units are litre and metre, and it's ONLY in the US that anyone believes differently.
Stones are still used by the older generation, but no longer taught. Same with feet for height. (People are usually described in centimetres.) And a pint (of beer) is an entity unto itself, a piece of sacred anachronism.
Oh yes, The License. What about The License? We can't touch ANYTHING that isn't blessed by The License, lest it be a trap set by our enemies to smite us.
Fuck the license! The GPL and the endless whining over license minutae have done more harm to Linux and its public image than Microsoft, SCO, the RIAA, and bad hygiene combined!
Every single FUCKING preemptive license question is a guarantee that even more people are going to explicitly avoid Linux, and free software in general.
The problem is that you're living in a different world. In Linuxland, gcc most definitely is it. However, gcc is nowhere NEAR "it" when you're talking about Sun gear. Changing from gcc to Sun Forte would increase performance by an average of 15% off the top, on the Sparc/Solaris platform.
Basically, while admins use gcc all the time on Sparc/Solaris, any real projects purchase the Sun compiler and enjoy the extra performance that it brings.
First of all, I shouldn't HAVE to be careful! It's like having a business card with your name on it, and being scared to give it to anyone. We need to get RID of these criminals.
Secondly, you're lucky. Despite jealously guarding my email addresses over the years, eventually a dictionary attack finds me. Despite not posting my real email address ANYWHERE, my personal account currently gets about 100/day.
Sooner or later, it hits everyone. A year ago I was getting about 5/week and I thought that my care had solved the issue, when in fact it was just buying me more time.
64-bit binaries run slower than 32? That's certainly the dogma in the x86 world, where 64-bit is in its infancy. That was the belief about Solaris/Sparc and the HP/AIX equivalents FIVE YEARS AGO maybe.
Running benchmarks of 32 vs. 64 bit binaries in a 64 bit Sparc/Solaris environment has shown little or no difference for us, on many occasions. If the author had used Sun's compiler instead of the substantially less-than-optimal gcc, I expect that his 20% average difference would have disappeared.
First of all, have you looked at the conductivity of silver nitrate, sulfide, or sulfate? They dont' conduct "nearly as well as silver itself." In fact, they're really damned poor conductors--but they are conductors.
Secondly, has no one considered the ease of silver oxidising, vs. copper? Copper is relatively stable, certainly in comparison to silver.
Thirdly, um...who cares? Thermal conductivity and electrical conductivity are different properties, and a good thermal paste can be made without any metal at all, thus eliminating the problem.
These silver pastes are a pure sales gimmick, whether they work or not.
You seem to misunderstand the meaning of speaker wattage. This is the MAXIMUM power the speakers can withstand for a short time (I believe 1/4 second) without blowing up. It has no bearing whatsoever on speaker quality, efficiency (how loud they play at a given volume setting), amplifier requirements, or how loud they're "designed" to be played. Ignore that number entirely; it has no relevance for you.
That said, I settled on the Logitech speakers for my computer after a lot of listening--they're the only ones I found that sounded like music. I will admit that I didn't listen to the Klipsches, because they were out of my price range. I expect that they'd be quite good, as they make non-computer speakers which are very nice indeed. (Mind you, Altec-Lansing makes stereo speakers too, and their computer offerings are without exception, unmitigated shite!)
If you have a passable amp, then unpowered stereo speakers are likely to be the best choice. A few years ago, it would have been the only choice, but a few computer speakers are at least considering.
But ignore the 200watt rating. Even if it were valid (it's not), it's completely meaningless and irrelevant to your shopping.
The machines are application driven, and a lot of applications run FAR better (or in some cases, exclusively) on Solaris/Sparc stuff. If you need to run the apps, you need the workstations.
And make no mistake; a dual processor Blade2500 with a pair of XVR-1200s is a MONSTER workstation for certain apps.
Kernel upgrades happen frequently? You must have a different attitude towards patching than most shops I know.
Here, patches are applied when (a) a problem occurs that's addressed by a patch, or (b) a patch addresses a potential crucial bug on our systems.
Many of our production servers are running Solaris8 kernel patch -18, because they're stable and secure. No need to patch the E4500 to fix the latest Sunfire memory issue.
I would ask what your coworkers are using their blades for. They're not intended as a replacement for a PC. They're not a good replacement for a PC. They are however, good workstations.
CDs came out at $20 some two decades ago, and have stayed around that price ever since. That is until November, when the major distributors took $6 off of their prices!
So now CDs are $14 CDN list, and often a few bucks off of that on sale. In contrast, I remember paying $12-$14 for records back in 1982.
Secondly, arguing over price misses the point--it's exactly like arguing how large a binary "on" signal is. My niece isn't saying that she doesn't want to buy music because it's too expensive or inappropriately priced--she's saying that as long as she can get stuff for free (legally or not), then she can't see any reason to pay for it at ALL. That's a scary precedent.
"The sooner the major labels lose their grip, the sooner this will happen."
I can't argue that one bit. The problem is that as long as we're not actively helping the musicians, we're helping the RIAA.
I act and think in a very similar manner to you. I've downloaded a bit of stuff, and as a result have bought albums. (or in some cases, decided not to buy them--just as fair)
The problem is that each generation (or maybe micro-generation?) of listeners is less and less inclined to buy music. Over Christmas, I was talking to my 17 year old niece who was pushing the claim that "buying music is a waste of money! Why would I do something like that?" This is particularly ironic, because my brother (her step-dad) is a full time professional musician.
This is where I worry about downloading. Eventually, and it may be another three years or more, there will be a very strong mindset that music shouldn't be paid for at all, in any form. That will hurt musicians--ALL musicians, but especially the small indies.
This is true, but we have a formal ruling on internet names which prevents this sort of thing.
Ten years ago (man, was it really that long?) if you registered coke.com, then you could sell it for whatever price you could get. A few years later, either IANA or ICANN decided that this was no longer fair game, and laid down the law. From that point forward, squatting solely for the sake of profit-taking would no longer be allowed.
Now did those people who were squatting get screwed by this ruling? Yep, I'd say they did. However, that was some time ago--anyone who deliberately registers a famous domain name and then doesn't use it for reasonable purposes can fully expect this sort of thing. In fact, they can almost guarantee that it'll happen, sooner or later.
Note also that by ruling against squatting like this, they are implicitly assigning an inherent meaning to the domain name, as a measure of its value. In fact, the name itself and the meaning assigned to it is the ONLY measure of value it has.
Let's also not forget just why (and how strongly) squatting was censured, up until the web got firmly established. The internet was originally set up as a noncommercial, nonprofit entity. That's clearly gone by the wayside, but I don't see why that means we need to strictly enforce aggressive opportunistic capitalism at every turn.
You're right, but the question is, at what point does squatting lose its legitimacy?
Imagine people running around in a virgin country, sticking up signs every thirty miles or so at random, saying "this is my land." Should they be able to collect on it all, if those signs are the only claim they have?
Conversely, if they grab a spot of land, homestead it, and live on it, then it's pretty clear that they should be able to keep it. Even just living in a tent on unimproved land is a valid claim.
This is, potentially at least, the first case. I'm not sure exactly how I feel about it all.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not sure. This will be my first non-headless (headful?!) Linux box. What alternatives do I have, and what are the tradeoffs?
Please understand: This is a serious question.
I have a PC containing an nVidia card, running Linux. Does anyone have any objections if I use these drivers for myself?
Put another way, am I causing any apparent harm by using these drivers, and implicitly supporting nVidia's efforts?
Hmm...
I get a bit annoyed (OK, sometimes REALLY annoyed) at people in the Linux world equating the use of Linux and being an OSS zealot.
Personally, I don't give a rat's ass. If Linux does the job I want it to, better or cheaper than someone else, then I'll use it. If I want to use it, I'll use it. I am not, however, going to town banging on doors and windows about GPL, OSS, and the purity of my morals. If someone else wants to, that's fine. Just don't ruin it for the rest of us. (i.e. by discouraging companies who make good hardware from supporting Linux at all.)
Your post doesn't make me think that you're one of these, but it was a good segue to my point.
As for the car analogy, it brings up the question of compromise. To wit: I live in an area where I can't do without a car, so I had to buy one. I did, however, put fuel efficiency and reliability near the top of my 'important features' list, to cut down on the environmental costs. Furthermore - because I can, I take the bus to work.
Edison invented SOME of the things he patented. He didn't invent the lightbulb, for instance. (it was argued at the time that he was unaware of Swann's work, but that's been effectively proven false.) He DID take out some patents for the sole purpose of suing people. He also created a company that heavily sponsored group activities (box socials, dances, etc.) but also worked them ferociously hard. He was a perfect example of capitalism unrestrained, none of which really affects my original point: He and many others have abused the patent system towards their own ends as long as it has existed.
Something that people don't seem to realise (not just on /., but in the world in general) is that the patent system has been abused for centuries. Eli Whitney spent decades in the courts, trying to prevent people from making and selling ripoffs of his (patented) cotton gin, and by the time he won, the patent was only valid for one more year. Edison, in contrast, patented everything under the sun and sued people black and blue over trivial or non-existent issues.
The point is that the patent system has been open to abuse as long as it's been around, and it's not likely to change in the next two years or so, as most seem here seem to think. Even if the abuses are so flagrantly worse now than ever before that it really is going to collapse, there's a LOT of momentum, and it's going to take a decade or more.
So push it hard, but don't expect to see much movement for a while.
He didn't say ditch the stuff already made, he said ditch the units. You should have quit using them decades ago like the rest of the world, and by now you wouldn't have any problems. However, start making the switch NOW, instead of complaining about how hard it will be and how long it will take.
When your water pump dies, get one that measures pressure in kPa. Computer case dimensions are neither particularly important, or likely to be manufactured in Imperial units anyways. I'll be that they've all been made metric, and measured in inches for the US market. At least the ones made overseas (which is nearly all of them).
The point is, start changing now! Come join the rest of the world!
Actually, nothing outside the US is in meters or liters. The official units are litre and metre, and it's ONLY in the US that anyone believes differently.
Stones are still used by the older generation, but no longer taught. Same with feet for height. (People are usually described in centimetres.) And a pint (of beer) is an entity unto itself, a piece of sacred anachronism.
That's just fucking cool. Crazy, but cool.
Oh yes, The License. What about The License? We can't touch ANYTHING that isn't blessed by The License, lest it be a trap set by our enemies to smite us.
Fuck the license! The GPL and the endless whining over license minutae have done more harm to Linux and its public image than Microsoft, SCO, the RIAA, and bad hygiene combined!
Every single FUCKING preemptive license question is a guarantee that even more people are going to explicitly avoid Linux, and free software in general.
The problem is that you're living in a different world. In Linuxland, gcc most definitely is it. However, gcc is nowhere NEAR "it" when you're talking about Sun gear. Changing from gcc to Sun Forte would increase performance by an average of 15% off the top, on the Sparc/Solaris platform.
Basically, while admins use gcc all the time on Sparc/Solaris, any real projects purchase the Sun compiler and enjoy the extra performance that it brings.
First of all, I shouldn't HAVE to be careful! It's like having a business card with your name on it, and being scared to give it to anyone. We need to get RID of these criminals.
Secondly, you're lucky. Despite jealously guarding my email addresses over the years, eventually a dictionary attack finds me. Despite not posting my real email address ANYWHERE, my personal account currently gets about 100/day.
Sooner or later, it hits everyone. A year ago I was getting about 5/week and I thought that my care had solved the issue, when in fact it was just buying me more time.
64-bit binaries run slower than 32? That's certainly the dogma in the x86 world, where 64-bit is in its infancy. That was the belief about Solaris/Sparc and the HP/AIX equivalents FIVE YEARS AGO maybe.
Running benchmarks of 32 vs. 64 bit binaries in a 64 bit Sparc/Solaris environment has shown little or no difference for us, on many occasions. If the author had used Sun's compiler instead of the substantially less-than-optimal gcc, I expect that his 20% average difference would have disappeared.
First of all, have you looked at the conductivity of silver nitrate, sulfide, or sulfate? They dont' conduct "nearly as well as silver itself." In fact, they're really damned poor conductors--but they are conductors.
Secondly, has no one considered the ease of silver oxidising, vs. copper? Copper is relatively stable, certainly in comparison to silver.
Thirdly, um...who cares? Thermal conductivity and electrical conductivity are different properties, and a good thermal paste can be made without any metal at all, thus eliminating the problem.
These silver pastes are a pure sales gimmick, whether they work or not.
People who know what they're talking about.
Egress filtering. Application-level firewalls. This is EXACTLY what they exist for.
You seem to misunderstand the meaning of speaker wattage. This is the MAXIMUM power the speakers can withstand for a short time (I believe 1/4 second) without blowing up. It has no bearing whatsoever on speaker quality, efficiency (how loud they play at a given volume setting), amplifier requirements, or how loud they're "designed" to be played. Ignore that number entirely; it has no relevance for you.
That said, I settled on the Logitech speakers for my computer after a lot of listening--they're the only ones I found that sounded like music. I will admit that I didn't listen to the Klipsches, because they were out of my price range. I expect that they'd be quite good, as they make non-computer speakers which are very nice indeed. (Mind you, Altec-Lansing makes stereo speakers too, and their computer offerings are without exception, unmitigated shite!)
If you have a passable amp, then unpowered stereo speakers are likely to be the best choice. A few years ago, it would have been the only choice, but a few computer speakers are at least considering.
But ignore the 200watt rating. Even if it were valid (it's not), it's completely meaningless and irrelevant to your shopping.
Applications.
The machines are application driven, and a lot of applications run FAR better (or in some cases, exclusively) on Solaris/Sparc stuff. If you need to run the apps, you need the workstations.
And make no mistake; a dual processor Blade2500 with a pair of XVR-1200s is a MONSTER workstation for certain apps.
Kernel upgrades happen frequently? You must have a different attitude towards patching than most shops I know.
Here, patches are applied when (a) a problem occurs that's addressed by a patch, or (b) a patch addresses a potential crucial bug on our systems.
Many of our production servers are running Solaris8 kernel patch -18, because they're stable and secure. No need to patch the E4500 to fix the latest Sunfire memory issue.
I would ask what your coworkers are using their blades for. They're not intended as a replacement for a PC. They're not a good replacement for a PC. They are however, good workstations.
Yep. Jail time and fines. The only way to stop stupidity like this.
Of course, they'd also have to chuck away whoever GRANTED the patent in the first place.
Hmm. Things must be different here in Canada.
CDs came out at $20 some two decades ago, and have stayed around that price ever since. That is until November, when the major distributors took $6 off of their prices!
So now CDs are $14 CDN list, and often a few bucks off of that on sale. In contrast, I remember paying $12-$14 for records back in 1982.
Secondly, arguing over price misses the point--it's exactly like arguing how large a binary "on" signal is. My niece isn't saying that she doesn't want to buy music because it's too expensive or inappropriately priced--she's saying that as long as she can get stuff for free (legally or not), then she can't see any reason to pay for it at ALL. That's a scary precedent.
"The sooner the major labels lose their grip, the sooner this will happen."
I can't argue that one bit. The problem is that as long as we're not actively helping the musicians, we're helping the RIAA.
I thought most people would be bright enough to understand that they don't need to get music they don't like. Apparently not though.
I act and think in a very similar manner to you. I've downloaded a bit of stuff, and as a result have bought albums. (or in some cases, decided not to buy them--just as fair)
The problem is that each generation (or maybe micro-generation?) of listeners is less and less inclined to buy music. Over Christmas, I was talking to my 17 year old niece who was pushing the claim that "buying music is a waste of money! Why would I do something like that?" This is particularly ironic, because my brother (her step-dad) is a full time professional musician.
This is where I worry about downloading. Eventually, and it may be another three years or more, there will be a very strong mindset that music shouldn't be paid for at all, in any form. That will hurt musicians--ALL musicians, but especially the small indies.
Simple as that. They're trying to do everything we've wanted to see in online music. Support them, and show that it CAN work.
This is true, but we have a formal ruling on internet names which prevents this sort of thing.
Ten years ago (man, was it really that long?) if you registered coke.com, then you could sell it for whatever price you could get. A few years later, either IANA or ICANN decided that this was no longer fair game, and laid down the law. From that point forward, squatting solely for the sake of profit-taking would no longer be allowed.
Now did those people who were squatting get screwed by this ruling? Yep, I'd say they did. However, that was some time ago--anyone who deliberately registers a famous domain name and then doesn't use it for reasonable purposes can fully expect this sort of thing. In fact, they can almost guarantee that it'll happen, sooner or later.
Note also that by ruling against squatting like this, they are implicitly assigning an inherent meaning to the domain name, as a measure of its value. In fact, the name itself and the meaning assigned to it is the ONLY measure of value it has.
Let's also not forget just why (and how strongly) squatting was censured, up until the web got firmly established. The internet was originally set up as a noncommercial, nonprofit entity. That's clearly gone by the wayside, but I don't see why that means we need to strictly enforce aggressive opportunistic capitalism at every turn.
You're right, but the question is, at what point does squatting lose its legitimacy?
Imagine people running around in a virgin country, sticking up signs every thirty miles or so at random, saying "this is my land." Should they be able to collect on it all, if those signs are the only claim they have?
Conversely, if they grab a spot of land, homestead it, and live on it, then it's pretty clear that they should be able to keep it. Even just living in a tent on unimproved land is a valid claim.
This is, potentially at least, the first case. I'm not sure exactly how I feel about it all.
Me! I asked for it!
Kodak hasn't made a passable camera in decades--haven't even tried, for that matter.
No worries. They're still making excellent film.