No, the answer is not a standard protocol. Why ? Because this is about servers, not clients.
You could have the most efficient, elegant, easy to implement protocol, it won't take because users have their "biddy list" on a different server and "One server to find them all" is the only available option.
IM world today is what the web would have been if a couple of entities controlled the DNS: No matter how good your DNS client or server is, as long as the root are owned by private companies, you'll be left out of the big picture.
If you'd be offering content that AOL wanted, they'd be the one comming to you and ask to set a peering with you. That's the way it always worked: if you wanted data from someone, you'd either setup the line to him or get into an agreement to share the line cost (that is, if they had any interest in what YOU offered).
Between telco, this is much more common than between other types of users: they all are in business to exchange data so they often have common interest in using a line.
The problem with Africa (and it was the same with Europe until recently) is that the weight of local content against the one available in th US is overwelming. This situation is getting worse because of the way US companies see the world: US and the rest (and often enough, the motto is. "The rest can get lost"). If you combine the two, you can only come to the conclusion that US providers have no interest to create peerings with African ones, in particular since there is little choice for them but buy the line back or loose all their users.
Except that writing a parser for such things takes a good 90 seconds if you're doing it from scratch and exactly 0 if you're using a good library.
Re:Relay-testing
on
ORBZ Shuts Down
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
You are wrwong on two accounts.
First, you're wrong when you say "repeatedly exploit bugs in other people's software to bring down services". You're mixing effects and intends. The EFFECT is a crashed/hung server. The intend, however, is quite different.
Second, internet mail software must follow a set of rules defined by the relevant RFCs. If a server software do not follow these rules and crashes when they are followed by third parties on it, it shouldn't be put into use on the internet and, if it is, then the blame clearely can't be put on the external party (in particular if it can be proved that the intend wasn't to DOS the server, somthing quite easy in this case).
Now, this mostly boils down to: do the ORBZ scans follow the RFCs. Well, I've been scanned several times and, so far, I've not seen anything that wasn't abbiding to the RFCs.
I think you make one wrong assumption
on
The Drone War
·
· Score: 1
And that is that a drone vs. drone war will show only drone fighting drones.
In such a conflict, it is muc more likely that the target will be the control systems and supply chain. And since a drone has little self-preservation instict, it means that striking in depth of ennemy territory at strategically or psychologically important target gets more and more likely. And since such targets are in "safe" areas, it means that the number of civilian casualty will be high.
In fact, if you look at the attack of the twin towers, you might begin to understand what it means. Although not performed by drones but by fanatics ready to sacrifice themselves (and a high number of innocents) to a "cause", it has the same pattern: low costs in human live for the attacker but terrible effectiveness due to the highly visible target.
No, I really don't think that, should several parties decide to engage in such a war, civilian casualty and overall wreckage of one's economic will be any less than in the past conflit. The only reason it is so today is the incredible technological and logistical difference between the parties.
ZeoSync's approach to the encoding of practically random sequences is expected to evolve into the reduction of already reduced information across many reduction iterations, producing a previously unattainable reduction capability.
In other words: recursive looseless compression which has been proved to be impossible on random dataset.
To me, interviewing someone from a content blocking firm about the problem of mail filter is just like asking a gun shop owner to talk about self-defence: you are bound to get an article full of exclamation point, but little unbiased opinion.
Asking someone responsible for mail servers or spam complains at a large ISP would have proven much more interesting and probably much more accurate.
(maybe there should be some more filtering in the/. inbox, just to avoid unwanted commercial articles;) )
Very little is what you'll get: The ability to run several user sessions at the same time, a prettier or, at least, changable UI, some beginner-oriented things that you're likely to turn off as soon as you find them and several, mostly useless features.
But XP isn't supposed to be a revolution to you: it's supposed to be a revolution for 9x user who will get a solid kernel at last and some of the goodies from the NT world.
It also means that developpers can begin to imagine a world where they do not have to support that piece of^h^h^h^h^h^h win9x...
No, "My services" is actually much more than that: It's a large set of services ranging from IC client (the one you spoke about) to user preferences, favorite links, application settings, online wallet and others (including the infamous "passport").
But yes: it's the price to be paid for your application to be allowed access to these services. Incidentally, it also means that you can pretty easily rollout your own, MS-compatible services (that is, until they change it to include some sort of proprietary tech in there).
This is actually a much more complex problem: ".net" is a buzzword use for everything and it's opposit on today's MS products: from "application framework" to productr denomination to general startegie to actual technology to services.
It's actually becomming a real problem in the developpement because so many people are confused by this that they think that only "VS.net" can create web service applications and that only ".net server" can be used as a server plateform.
This has been taken a few steps forward some years ago. Nowaday, visual programming (that is, not VC++) goes much further than simply designing user interfaces: you can embeed a large number of backside functionalities directly from the IDE's visual designer.
A good exemple is Delphi (or Kylix): you developpe daemons and backoffice applications (up to web applications) the same way you program front office apps: you drop components on a container (wich is a non-visula module, not a form) and set their properties. Sure, you add some code to glue everything together but, all in all, you still spend a lot of time in the visual designer.
Are we living in the same world you and me ?? Windows was popular and widespread long before VB came into play. True, it allowed a large number of "power users" to test their fingers at programming (and I'm far from convinced it's a good thing) and therefore helped increase the number of program available for Windows, but it was the office suite that really changed things...
Except that all news client I know displays the extention anyway so you'll have to save the file and open the folder you saved it to in order to have the extention hidden
According to the 3Dfx FAQ, wich is all we have to go for now, the memory is shared except for textures. Therefore, 128 Megs = 128 Megs of video memory for most situations.
Slashdot Mirror
No, the answer is not a standard protocol. Why ? Because this is about servers, not clients.
You could have the most efficient, elegant, easy to implement protocol, it won't take because users have their "biddy list" on a different server and "One server to find them all" is the only available option.
IM world today is what the web would have been if a couple of entities controlled the DNS: No matter how good your DNS client or server is, as long as the root are owned by private companies, you'll be left out of the big picture.
You missed the point.
If you'd be offering content that AOL wanted, they'd be the one comming to you and ask to set a peering with you. That's the way it always worked: if you wanted data from someone, you'd either setup the line to him or get into an agreement to share the line cost (that is, if they had any interest in what YOU offered).
Between telco, this is much more common than between other types of users: they all are in business to exchange data so they often have common interest in using a line.
The problem with Africa (and it was the same with Europe until recently) is that the weight of local content against the one available in th US is overwelming. This situation is getting worse because of the way US companies see the world: US and the rest (and often enough, the motto is. "The rest can get lost"). If you combine the two, you can only come to the conclusion that US providers have no interest to create peerings with African ones, in particular since there is little choice for them but buy the line back or loose all their users.
You know: security by obscurity doesn't work, we all know that (or, at least, should know it).
Except that writing a parser for such things takes a good 90 seconds if you're doing it from scratch and exactly 0 if you're using a good library.
You are wrwong on two accounts.
First, you're wrong when you say "repeatedly exploit bugs in other people's software to bring down services". You're mixing effects and intends. The EFFECT is a crashed/hung server. The intend, however, is quite different.
Second, internet mail software must follow a set of rules defined by the relevant RFCs. If a server software do not follow these rules and crashes when they are followed by third parties on it, it shouldn't be put into use on the internet and, if it is, then the blame clearely can't be put on the external party (in particular if it can be proved that the intend wasn't to DOS the server, somthing quite easy in this case).
Now, this mostly boils down to: do the ORBZ scans follow the RFCs. Well, I've been scanned several times and, so far, I've not seen anything that wasn't abbiding to the RFCs.
And that is that a drone vs. drone war will show only drone fighting drones.
In such a conflict, it is muc more likely that the target will be the control systems and supply chain. And since a drone has little self-preservation instict, it means that striking in depth of ennemy territory at strategically or psychologically important target gets more and more likely. And since such targets are in "safe" areas, it means that the number of civilian casualty will be high.
In fact, if you look at the attack of the twin towers, you might begin to understand what it means. Although not performed by drones but by fanatics ready to sacrifice themselves (and a high number of innocents) to a "cause", it has the same pattern: low costs in human live for the attacker but terrible effectiveness due to the highly visible target.
No, I really don't think that, should several parties decide to engage in such a war, civilian casualty and overall wreckage of one's economic will be any less than in the past conflit. The only reason it is so today is the incredible technological and logistical difference between the parties.
To me, interviewing someone from a content blocking firm about the problem of mail filter is just like asking a gun shop owner to talk about self-defence: you are bound to get an article full of exclamation point, but little unbiased opinion.
/. inbox, just to avoid unwanted commercial articles ;) )
Asking someone responsible for mail servers or spam complains at a large ISP would have proven much more interesting and probably much more accurate.
(maybe there should be some more filtering in the
Very little is what you'll get: The ability to run several user sessions at the same time, a prettier or, at least, changable UI, some beginner-oriented things that you're likely to turn off as soon as you find them and several, mostly useless features.
But XP isn't supposed to be a revolution to you: it's supposed to be a revolution for 9x user who will get a solid kernel at last and some of the goodies from the NT world.
It also means that developpers can begin to imagine a world where they do not have to support that piece of^h^h^h^h^h^h win9x...
>
No, "My services" is actually much more than that: It's a large set of services ranging from IC client (the one you spoke about) to user preferences, favorite links, application settings, online wallet and others (including the infamous "passport").
But yes: it's the price to be paid for your application to be allowed access to these services. Incidentally, it also means that you can pretty easily rollout your own, MS-compatible services (that is, until they change it to include some sort of proprietary tech in there).
Good luck,
Stephane
This is actually a much more complex problem: ".net" is a buzzword use for everything and it's opposit on today's MS products: from "application framework" to productr denomination to general startegie to actual technology to services.
It's actually becomming a real problem in the developpement because so many people are confused by this that they think that only "VS.net" can create web service applications and that only ".net server" can be used as a server plateform.
This has been taken a few steps forward some years ago. Nowaday, visual programming (that is, not VC++) goes much further than simply designing user interfaces: you can embeed a large number of backside functionalities directly from the IDE's visual designer. A good exemple is Delphi (or Kylix): you developpe daemons and backoffice applications (up to web applications) the same way you program front office apps: you drop components on a container (wich is a non-visula module, not a form) and set their properties. Sure, you add some code to glue everything together but, all in all, you still spend a lot of time in the visual designer.
95% of people polled believe their IQ is above average.
Well, that means that there is at least one INCREDIBLY stupid person out there :)
The top 1% of all nodes... What number does that exactly replresents ? Millions, probably., Now, 4%, that's a faily large number, isn't it ?
Not counting that no error correction was taking into account nor was the propagation time of the attack.
No, it really looks like another case of journatist going for the sensational line instead of doing a factual anylysis of the subject.
>
Are we living in the same world you and me ?? Windows was popular and widespread long before VB came into play. True, it allowed a large number of "power users" to test their fingers at programming (and I'm far from convinced it's a good thing) and therefore helped increase the number of program available for Windows, but it was the office suite that really changed things...
Stephane
Except that all news client I know displays the extention anyway so you'll have to save the file and open the folder you saved it to in order to have the extention hidden
Not exactly the same, is it ?
According to the 3Dfx FAQ, wich is all we have to go for now, the memory is shared except for textures. Therefore, 128 Megs = 128 Megs of video memory for most situations.