"... the available Hadoop technology, Powerset decided to give back to the community by developing an open-source analog to BigTable that is built on top of HDFS (Hadoop Distributed File System)." Since Hadoop is Apache License 2.0, presumably this extension is so too.
You are comparing a 200-year old city to a 1600-year old city? In that comparison there is hope that in the next 1400 years Sacramento will come up with something;-)
Seriously, I think quite the opposite. When the companies Mute peoples personal videos on youtube because they play copyrighted music. Or sue a 12 yr old for downloading mp3's. Up here in Canada I have been paying tax on CDR's despite not using them for actual music in probably 3 years. And then there is the extension of copyrighted material into infinite it seems.
Here is my take on it. If somebody is simply downloading or using copyrighted material for personal consumption then it should not be grounds for criminal action nor should it warrant the disconnection of what is considered a vital utility. On the other hand if you are PROFITING directly from distribution and SALE(Pirate Bay did neither) of copyrighted material then yes, you should be prosecuted, as you are stealing stem cells from the mouths of the starving media industry.
Add that you should not be allowed to upload or share the media to others (except for neighbor, family). Then you basically have the copyright situation in Austria. Sure, entertainment industry plays the same trailers with "Downloading is stealing" or similar, although they should know better.
How can Sony honestly cry foul after installing DRM onto my machine without first acknowledging me? I think installing remote software on a machines is FAR more illegal then redistributing sound. I think this alienation of the people that actually fund these companies is only going to lead to more people going out of their way to ensure not a cent ever makes it back to the media companies in retaliation for the lies and broken homes caused by this futile war on progress.
Saying you are allowed to do something because others did worse is a very bad excuse or motivation. It lead to torture and war. Even worse: To the continuance of wars.
- not cross-distribution
- yum can make mistakes (e.g. move your config files around)
- even if your binaries are updated, the running server are still executing the old (unlinked) code, you'll have to restart your services eventually
- if there is a critical kernel patch, you'll even have to reboot (probably less problematic if you run some virtualisation like Xen) There is no such thing as a perfect self-updating system that doesn't need your supervision (although I heard good things about the classic Debian).
What a friend of mine suggested to build for a similar use case was a cross-distribution server configuration tool (in Ruby) based on declarative configuration. For example, you provide a central configuration that says: """ need_package(apache) need_package(mysqld) need_package(remind)
use_configuration(/etc/my.cnf,my.cnf.2009)
""" and maybe some asserts...
Then, you run the program on each host and it figures out which packages it needs to install and fetches configuration files from the central server.
At the end, you should get the desired state on your (heterogeneous) machines, or reports why it failed.
A quick look down my process list (Fedora 11) shows top bulky processes are:
* FireFox with a resident size of 184MB
* Xorg with a resident size of 125MB
* Lots of Gnome bits and pieces totalling maybe 100MB
* Nautilus with a resident size of 33MB
And how much of that is just caching that will be free'd instantly when it is needed by another app? I'd prefer caches to memory lying around unused.
Using anything other than a human to judge the behaviour puts it outside of the Turing test. So not only does their proposed solution not match the goal they set, it should indeed be defeatable by another algorithm.
I imagine there will have to be a new job description for the webmaster...
The furthest traveled object (Voyager 1) has gone for over 30 years with very high speed and has not even left the planetary system yet (it is around the distance of Eris, ~110AU), not to mention Heliopause [1,2].
Thank you, exactly. You can find.torrent files through google and it seems people think that is all you need. A.torrent file is worthless without one or more well-visited trackers.
Google does not provide well-seeded.torrent files. TPB does/did.
Secondary, Google itself does not prefilter on that kind of content, thus remaining neutral. And they react on take-down notices for links, so nothing will happen to them.
A website explaining the law (in german only, sorry, try a translator). I was wrong though, it is based on the right to own a private copy (regardless of the source), not "Fair Use".
Downloading movies/music is actually legal in some countries (like Austria). It is protected by the "Fair Use". Uploading/Sharing is obviously prohibited. This makes using protocols that do uploading while downloading (like Bittorrent) illegal (for copyrighted content).
There are more aspects in the (EU) E-Commerce law, e.g. linking to obviously illegally hosted content, with exceptions for general purpose search engines, that you have to react in time if you (unknowingly) host links to infringing content, etc.
Slashdot Mirror
I just like watching the progress bars. I don't have time for movies either.
"... the available Hadoop technology, Powerset decided to give back to the community by developing an open-source analog to BigTable that is built on top of HDFS (Hadoop Distributed File System)."
Since Hadoop is Apache License 2.0, presumably this extension is so too.
It is called HBase according to the cited release post.
Wiki:
http://wiki.apache.org/hadoop/Hbase
Yahoo and Adobe seem to run it too (see PoweredBy).
Project website:
http://hadoop.apache.org/hbase/
Looking inside the last release tarball, it really is Apache License Version 2.0.
You are comparing a 200-year old city to a 1600-year old city? ;-)
In that comparison there is hope that in the next 1400 years Sacramento will come up with something
)
Sorry, I can't sleep if I know there is a bracket left open.
... release date (USC 17506(a)(1)(C) if you wanna look it up).
Lisp programmer?
Seriously, I think quite the opposite. When the companies Mute peoples personal videos on youtube because they play copyrighted music. Or sue a 12 yr old for downloading mp3's. Up here in Canada I have been paying tax on CDR's despite not using them for actual music in probably 3 years. And then there is the extension of copyrighted material into infinite it seems.
Here is my take on it. If somebody is simply downloading or using copyrighted material for personal consumption then it should not be grounds for criminal action nor should it warrant the disconnection of what is considered a vital utility. On the other hand if you are PROFITING directly from distribution and SALE(Pirate Bay did neither) of copyrighted material then yes, you should be prosecuted, as you are stealing stem cells from the mouths of the starving media industry.
Add that you should not be allowed to upload or share the media to others (except for neighbor, family). Then you basically have the copyright situation in Austria.
Sure, entertainment industry plays the same trailers with "Downloading is stealing" or similar, although they should know better.
How can Sony honestly cry foul after installing DRM onto my machine without first acknowledging me? I think installing remote software on a machines is FAR more illegal then redistributing sound. I think this alienation of the people that actually fund these companies is only going to lead to more people going out of their way to ensure not a cent ever makes it back to the media companies in retaliation for the lies and broken homes caused by this futile war on progress.
Saying you are allowed to do something because others did worse is a very bad excuse or motivation. It lead to torture and war. Even worse: To the continuance of wars.
My blog is a WMD :-\
Yo dawg, we heard you like control, so we put a botnet in your botnet so you can hijack while you hijack!
There will be a Firefox extension for opting them in so you too can enjoy them.
A crowd source is where crowds come from, like an apartment building.
Even the stork theory is better than this... Do you tell that your children too?
- not cross-distribution
- yum can make mistakes (e.g. move your config files around)
- even if your binaries are updated, the running server are still executing the old (unlinked) code, you'll have to restart your services eventually
- if there is a critical kernel patch, you'll even have to reboot (probably less problematic if you run some virtualisation like Xen)
There is no such thing as a perfect self-updating system that doesn't need your supervision (although I heard good things about the classic Debian).
What a friend of mine suggested to build for a similar use case was a cross-distribution server configuration tool (in Ruby) based on declarative configuration. For example, you provide a central configuration that says:
"""
need_package(apache)
need_package(mysqld)
need_package(remind)
use_configuration(/etc/my.cnf,my.cnf.2009)
"""
and maybe some asserts...
Then, you run the program on each host and it figures out which packages it needs to install and fetches configuration files from the central server.
At the end, you should get the desired state on your (heterogeneous) machines, or reports why it failed.
Man, I really should do this some time ...
Nothing beats paper (except scissors)
Lizard eats paper.
http://www.samkass.com/theories/RPSSL.html
Ok, I got this wrong. I was thinking about this feature:
"Normally, Firefox determines the memory cache usage dynamically based on the amount of available memory."
So available memory is somewhat avoided (why not).
A quick look down my process list (Fedora 11) shows top bulky processes are:
* FireFox with a resident size of 184MB
* Xorg with a resident size of 125MB
* Lots of Gnome bits and pieces totalling maybe 100MB
* Nautilus with a resident size of 33MB
And how much of that is just caching that will be free'd instantly when it is needed by another app? I'd prefer caches to memory lying around unused.
Using anything other than a human to judge the behaviour puts it outside of the Turing test. So not only does their proposed solution not match the goal they set, it should indeed be defeatable by another algorithm.
I imagine there will have to be a new job description for the webmaster ...
The websites are the horror from a windows end-user point of view.
Okular: no download, build descriptions? ...
MuPDF: A parser description?
Yap: That screenshot
Sumatra PDF: Looks good.
I can have cake in my belly.
The furthest traveled object (Voyager 1) has gone for over 30 years with very high speed and has not even left the planetary system yet (it is around the distance of Eris, ~110AU), not to mention Heliopause [1,2].
Here is your flight map though: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Solarmap.png (note: logarithmic)
Can we ever overtake this? Good luck getting a object faster than Voyager 1.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Voyager_1_entering_heliosheath_region.jpg
[2] http://heavens-above.com/solar-escape.asp?/
wasn't the whole point of 1337 its impenetrability?
imp--what?
Thank you, exactly. .torrent files through google and it seems people think that is all you need. .torrent file is worthless without one or more well-visited trackers.
You can find
A
Google does not provide well-seeded .torrent files. TPB does/did.
Secondary, Google itself does not prefilter on that kind of content, thus remaining neutral. And they react on take-down notices for links, so nothing will happen to them.
Or squid as reverse proxy.
Very realistic, except at 1:00 his thoughts are "that girl naked" ... even funnier with the "whaaa" :-)
Don't say "Simpsons did it", Southpark already did that.
A website explaining the law (in german only, sorry, try a translator).
I was wrong though, it is based on the right to own a private copy (regardless of the source), not "Fair Use".
Downloading movies/music is actually legal in some countries (like Austria). It is protected by the "Fair Use". Uploading/Sharing is obviously prohibited. This makes using protocols that do uploading while downloading (like Bittorrent) illegal (for copyrighted content).
There are more aspects in the (EU) E-Commerce law, e.g. linking to obviously illegally hosted content, with exceptions for general purpose search engines, that you have to react in time if you (unknowingly) host links to infringing content, etc.