Perhaps. But the single most valuable thing about both Reiser filesystems is how well they handle large numbers of small files. I hate Berkeley DB and its ilk with a passion. They take all kinds of valuable data that should be addressable with standard tools and obscure it in some weird format that I can't make any sense of without some specialized set of tools. Not only that, but they're slow!
I want to stop using these awful things. I want to use a hierarchical naming scheme to address the individual bits of data I'm stuffing into the filesystem without having to resort to stupid tricks with splitting up the name so I don't have anymore than 256 entries per directory.
None of the filesystems made for Linux aside from ReiserFS seem to even acknolwedge that this problem is worth solving. Personally, I think it is a major, short-sighted bellybutton gazing failure. The excuse seems to be "Well, you're using the filesystem in a strange way that nobody uses it in, so stop doing that!". But that's a completely circular argument. I simply do not WANT to contort my programs in such a ridiculous way to accomodate the failings of filesystem designs.
ReiserFS is fast and flexible. I've never had any data loss with 3. At least, not in the last 3 years or so. And I have a machine that will (for reasons of a bad motherboard) randomly lock up if I'm using both the disk and the Ethernet card heavily.
I don't really care that much about plug-ins. They're kind of a neat idea for having super-efficient storage for caches and stuff, but really I just want to be able to independently address millions of small pieces of data and have it be reasonably efficient.
Yes, except that I believe Hans claims she's still seeing that guy. I recall reading a statement to that effect when he was talking about the current suit.
Except that the majority of the big lies we've been hearing lately have come from one camp and not the other. HHOS.
Truthfully, I'd rather have heavily biased news sources flagged. Salon is a moderately biased news source. indymedia should be flagged as highly biased. And I agree with you to an extent that a heavily conservatively biased source is more likely to get flagged on Slashdot. It's partly because Slashdot has a mild bias itself, and partly because there have been an explosion in recent years of heavily conversatively biased news sources trying to pretend to be objective and/or middle-of-the-road.
I would be very surprised if someone who managed to run their own business had paranoid schizophrenia. People with schizophrenia generally have enough trouble holding down a job; and running your own business would probably be too much exposure. Also, being a coder who's managed to write his own filesystem would be another giveway he didn't have schizophrenia; that usually comes with lowered intellectual abilities.
I've likely taken away entirely more than was warranted from "A Beautiful Mind".:-)
I see the gist of your argument as Well, the university has no obligation to provide the easiest and most convenient access to all this material for learning. It's available from other sources. Heck, before the Internet you could get it.
Well, this is true. But I wouldn't call a university that didn't go out of it's way to make sure that students had easy and convenient access to all the material that culture produced, the some total of all human knowledge, a very good university. And a university that went out of its way to make sure that students can't get access to certain kinds of material without jumping through a lot of hoops would be a very poor university indeed.
So yes, while providing Internet access to be able to get at all this stuff is in some sense a luxury and a brand new thing. In another sense the university is severely derelict in its duty to provide the best possible learning environment for its students by purposely blocking access to certain parts of the Internet, as the Internet is currently the easiest and most convenient way to get at most of the information humanity has produced.
My conclusion is that Hans Reiser is likely a paranoid schizophrenic.
First he insists that his business associate was doing all this stuff with his wife behind his back, alleging a secret conspiracy. But, it turns out that his wife had a boyfriend who wasn't this business associate. The rational behavior for his wife would be to make the secret relationship public knowledge after the divorce, not to start a new publicly acknowledged relationship.
Hans contends that the relationship continued with his business associate in secret. The only reason she would do that would be to personally make his life unpleasant. But other aspects of her behavior don't fit this. Besides, it's not like people to engage in a secret conspiracy to ruin someone else's life for no benefit to themselves.
This also fits with his outbursts about code reviews and opinions about ReiserFS on LKML being politically rather than technically motivatd.
I'm inclined to believe that he murdered is wife, but it is only an inclination that I base on available evidence and is subject to change in the face of contradictory facts. But, I'm also inclined to believe that he should be classified as insane.
I'm really sad about this. Both for the tragedy of it (I'm aware enough of the idea of the monkeysphere to not pretend that I cared for his wife and kids since I've never met or talked to them and didn't even know they existed before this story), for Hans personally (as I've exchanged words with him on mailing lists), and for the beleagured future of my favorite filesystem.:-(
After reading more articles about this and thinking for a bit. It seems likely to me that Hans Reiser is suffering from a serious mental illness. *sigh* What awful consequences for Nina.
I really like ReiserFS though, and I hope work continues on it without him.
Wow. Either Hans is much nuttier than I thought (I thought he was just a bit of an egotist) or he managed to get into business with someone who was really awful. That story is on the edge of nutty, but it's just plausible enough to not be completely dismissable.
"Death Yoga" is a little out there though. I've seen references to the idea, but it seems a bit much for someone to demand that a business partner commit suicide in a particularly weird and unusual (and possibly impossible) way. Claiming it seems paranoid and delusional.
Anyway, the employees could just quit Namesys and form their own company that does the same thing. I'm sure that the people who made business arrangements with Namesys would understand the situation.
Why are you certain that the money will dry up? Do you mean for the profession, or for him personally as he gets older and his reflexes aren't as good? Maybe he'll go on to games where reflexes aren't that important. I don't think the assumption that the money will dry up is necessarily a good one. It's good to hedge against, but that's good advice no matter what you do.
Hmm... I'm reasonably well educated about copyrights, patents and trademarks, and I've never found anything RMS has said about them to be at variance with what I knew. In particular his writings on copyright are excellent and factual, and his opinions are clearly stated and well supported.
He doesn't in enough detail about the finer points of patent law though, and he should, because many of those finer points strongly indicate that patents no longer serve the purpose for which they were originally intended.
Of all the various bodies of law bundled under the term 'intellectual property' (a truly horrible term IMHO) trademark law is the kind I find least objectionable and is the least abused. Most of the abuses of trademark law I've seen have been to try to silence public debate by taking over domain names and such.
I don't disagree with your first paragraph, which is why designing something that makes a system insecure in the face of a nieve user is very hard. I'm not faulting IE for this anyway. Again, you are reading your own biases into my post.
And you are also correct in your second paragraph. And that's a bit of a mistake on my part. I did read the article, but failed to sufficiently place myself in the mindset of a nieve user and realize that the concept of a 'Manual Install' would flummox them.
Re:Is it really an infection if...
on
IE7 Toolbar Mayhem
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
It's only FUD to people who decide what it says based on their own biases and an unwillingness to read the article. I clicked through to the article, and even though it renders very badly on my browser for some reason, the parts I could read told me the IE was getting a lot better.
Someone clicking 'yes' to everything is not that far off from a typical user's behavior. Most people have no idea what any of that stuff means and not much of a desire to learn. They just want the computer to do what they think they told it to.
The actual physical object is a point in the middle, not the large sphere of non-escaping stuff around it.
So, you've seen this thing in the middle? What's it look like? Enquiring minds want to know!
You are possibly a troll, but it's rather standard to define the size of a black hole by the size of its event horizon. This is largely because we can't actually know anything about what there is behind the event horizon. Maybe there's a singularity there, and maybe there isn't. What we know of physics says there ought to be, but it seems impossible to observe, and trusting our physical theories in such extreme conditions is a big step of faith.
So, yes, in all the various articles about black holes that I've read, their size is defined by the size of their event horizon.
There are theories that posit the Universe is actually two-dimensional and that our experience of it as three-dimensional is actually more like a holographic projection of the two-dimensional reality. These theories are based on the relationship between a black hole's mass and its size that suggest that all the mass of a black hole is actually on the surface of the event horizon.
No, we're all so wrapped up in which club is the most popular that we don't actually really care how the country runs. Most of us are under the mistaken impression that our system can never go really wrong.
Take you, for instance. I bet you've managed to completely ignore the evidence mounting that Rumsfeld has personally authorized torture, that the war in Iraq was justified by supposed facts that the administration was well aware weren't true, that they leaked the name of a CIA agent for political gain, that there was plenty enough evidence lying around to figure out 9/11 was giong to happen and stop it before it did, that the government has been engaged in illegal spying operations on the American people, and a whole host of other injustices. You cover your ears and close your eyes and shout "Na na, I can't hear you!" like a petulant child while out of the other side of your face you invent all kinds of justifications that you think somehow condone behavior that's blatantly illegal. Not to mention the less flashy corporate corruption inherent in giving all the Iraq reconstruction deals to Haliburton.
At least the Democrats had the decency to be quietly embarassed about Bill Clinton's use of his office for personal gain (Tyson chicken (while he was governer), Whitewater and interns) and his lying on the stand. Republicans get in my face and shout "War is Peace!" "Freedom is Slavery!" "Criticism of the government is unpatriotic!" "Adultery is grounds for impeachment!". Lying on the stand is though, IMHO, but none of the Republicans seemed to be upset about that, perhaps because they didn't want to call attention to a behavior they seem to be so in love with themselves.
Not that I'm all that happy with the Democrats either. They want a nanny socialist state where everybody speaks very softly in order to avoid offending anyone. But I'd rather descend into that than the stick-up-your-ass facism the Republicans want, especially since they to a one seem to be in deep denial about it.
Ahh, the old "Don't blame our side, the other side does it too!" argument. It's strange how that argument works so poorly for little kids but seems to be the argument of choice for a political party.
Sponsored communities are bad because they look just like ordinary communties until you go look at them. I didn't pay to look at advertising. If someone on my friends page links to the stupid sponsored community, I'll end up going there and looking at the advertising. I pay LJ. I pay cold hard cash. I have a lot of data on their site. I have a big investment in them. It really annoys me that now there will be advertising there I can stumble across. I would never have started a blog on a site with advertising, I would've self-hosted it or something.
Their snarky "Well, you can just ignore it if you don't like it." is just ridiculous. I don't want to have to ignore it. I can ignore all the spam in my inbox to, but that doesn't mean its OK.
I agree that this is true. And it bothers me that this has happened to Microsoft. I will submit that they brought it on themselves though. Everybody knows that they received absolutely no substansive punishment in the US for their conviction on violating the Sherman Antitrust Act. So, I suspect that judges in these cases are really inclined to throw the book at Microsoft. I don't think it's right that judges are not being impartial in this way. But I think it's what's happening.
I do think that the complete lack of any kind of substansive punishment is a greater wrong.
You're also right about having to play the software patent game. That's perhaps the most evil thing about software patents. The MAD mentality it encourages which profits nobody but the patent office and patent lawyers.
Then clearly something is wrong, because if you are correct, and all the rules were followed, they led to a ridiculous and untenable outcome in this particular case.
I also don't recall having had to sign any little pieces of paper when I've been through customs to Canada. So I think that whole line is a bunch of BS you invented because you have some irrational feeling that authority is always right.
So, no pieces of paper mean that either the US standards (the 4th amendment) or the Canadian standards (discussed elsewhere in this thread) for searching people's belongings for stuff apply. Those standards were invented to prevent state harassment of citizenry and to provide a cap on what kind of consensual crime laws could be enforced by the state.
This is true. I use emacs and ipython as my Python IDE. They work fairly well, but don't look nearly as slick as Eclipse. There is IDLE and PyPE, but they are a lot less ambitious (or, from another perspective, overfeatured and bloated) than Eclipse. But, I wouldn't generally use them as I've rarely found that sort of development tool useful. And I've made a go of using them for a long time too because everybody else has raved so much about them. I've come to the conclusion that they prefer an illusion to reality.
But, I personally find Eclipse to be cumbersome and to do a great deal to obscure what's really going on. I find it highly amusing that a tool like that is all the fashion in Java. It reinforces my opinion of it as the new COBOL. A hand holding tool for programmers who don't really want to know how their computer actually does anything and want a tinkertoy programming environment that attempts to dumb down complicated things so they appear superficially simple.
Slashdot Mirror
Perhaps. But the single most valuable thing about both Reiser filesystems is how well they handle large numbers of small files. I hate Berkeley DB and its ilk with a passion. They take all kinds of valuable data that should be addressable with standard tools and obscure it in some weird format that I can't make any sense of without some specialized set of tools. Not only that, but they're slow!
I want to stop using these awful things. I want to use a hierarchical naming scheme to address the individual bits of data I'm stuffing into the filesystem without having to resort to stupid tricks with splitting up the name so I don't have anymore than 256 entries per directory.
None of the filesystems made for Linux aside from ReiserFS seem to even acknolwedge that this problem is worth solving. Personally, I think it is a major, short-sighted bellybutton gazing failure. The excuse seems to be "Well, you're using the filesystem in a strange way that nobody uses it in, so stop doing that!". But that's a completely circular argument. I simply do not WANT to contort my programs in such a ridiculous way to accomodate the failings of filesystem designs.
ReiserFS is fast and flexible. I've never had any data loss with 3. At least, not in the last 3 years or so. And I have a machine that will (for reasons of a bad motherboard) randomly lock up if I'm using both the disk and the Ethernet card heavily.
I don't really care that much about plug-ins. They're kind of a neat idea for having super-efficient storage for caches and stuff, but really I just want to be able to independently address millions of small pieces of data and have it be reasonably efficient.
Yes, except that I believe Hans claims she's still seeing that guy. I recall reading a statement to that effect when he was talking about the current suit.
Except that the majority of the big lies we've been hearing lately have come from one camp and not the other. HHOS.
Truthfully, I'd rather have heavily biased news sources flagged. Salon is a moderately biased news source. indymedia should be flagged as highly biased. And I agree with you to an extent that a heavily conservatively biased source is more likely to get flagged on Slashdot. It's partly because Slashdot has a mild bias itself, and partly because there have been an explosion in recent years of heavily conversatively biased news sources trying to pretend to be objective and/or middle-of-the-road.
I've likely taken away entirely more than was warranted from "A Beautiful Mind". :-)
That's true. :-) I never tried to claim it wasn't.
Wonderously disingenuous. I'm proud.
I see the gist of your argument as Well, the university has no obligation to provide the easiest and most convenient access to all this material for learning. It's available from other sources. Heck, before the Internet you could get it.
Well, this is true. But I wouldn't call a university that didn't go out of it's way to make sure that students had easy and convenient access to all the material that culture produced, the some total of all human knowledge, a very good university. And a university that went out of its way to make sure that students can't get access to certain kinds of material without jumping through a lot of hoops would be a very poor university indeed.
So yes, while providing Internet access to be able to get at all this stuff is in some sense a luxury and a brand new thing. In another sense the university is severely derelict in its duty to provide the best possible learning environment for its students by purposely blocking access to certain parts of the Internet, as the Internet is currently the easiest and most convenient way to get at most of the information humanity has produced.
My conclusion is that Hans Reiser is likely a paranoid schizophrenic.
First he insists that his business associate was doing all this stuff with his wife behind his back, alleging a secret conspiracy. But, it turns out that his wife had a boyfriend who wasn't this business associate. The rational behavior for his wife would be to make the secret relationship public knowledge after the divorce, not to start a new publicly acknowledged relationship.
Hans contends that the relationship continued with his business associate in secret. The only reason she would do that would be to personally make his life unpleasant. But other aspects of her behavior don't fit this. Besides, it's not like people to engage in a secret conspiracy to ruin someone else's life for no benefit to themselves.
This also fits with his outbursts about code reviews and opinions about ReiserFS on LKML being politically rather than technically motivatd.
I'm inclined to believe that he murdered is wife, but it is only an inclination that I base on available evidence and is subject to change in the face of contradictory facts. But, I'm also inclined to believe that he should be classified as insane.
I'm really sad about this. Both for the tragedy of it (I'm aware enough of the idea of the monkeysphere to not pretend that I cared for his wife and kids since I've never met or talked to them and didn't even know they existed before this story), for Hans personally (as I've exchanged words with him on mailing lists), and for the beleagured future of my favorite filesystem. :-(
How is blocking the Village Voice (an online newspaper) not about censorship? You are a total tool.
That's not true. The stock market is not a zero-sum game.
That's my thought about the books too. But my suspicion is that he has mental health issues and did it without any premeditation.
After reading more articles about this and thinking for a bit. It seems likely to me that Hans Reiser is suffering from a serious mental illness. *sigh* What awful consequences for Nina.
I really like ReiserFS though, and I hope work continues on it without him.
Wow. Either Hans is much nuttier than I thought (I thought he was just a bit of an egotist) or he managed to get into business with someone who was really awful. That story is on the edge of nutty, but it's just plausible enough to not be completely dismissable.
"Death Yoga" is a little out there though. I've seen references to the idea, but it seems a bit much for someone to demand that a business partner commit suicide in a particularly weird and unusual (and possibly impossible) way. Claiming it seems paranoid and delusional.
Anyway, the employees could just quit Namesys and form their own company that does the same thing. I'm sure that the people who made business arrangements with Namesys would understand the situation.
Why are you certain that the money will dry up? Do you mean for the profession, or for him personally as he gets older and his reflexes aren't as good? Maybe he'll go on to games where reflexes aren't that important. I don't think the assumption that the money will dry up is necessarily a good one. It's good to hedge against, but that's good advice no matter what you do.
Ahh. :-) That's actually an interesting distinction. I'm not sure how I can state that in a way that reduces the MEGO factor of the people who read it.
Hmm... I'm reasonably well educated about copyrights, patents and trademarks, and I've never found anything RMS has said about them to be at variance with what I knew. In particular his writings on copyright are excellent and factual, and his opinions are clearly stated and well supported.
He doesn't in enough detail about the finer points of patent law though, and he should, because many of those finer points strongly indicate that patents no longer serve the purpose for which they were originally intended.
Of all the various bodies of law bundled under the term 'intellectual property' (a truly horrible term IMHO) trademark law is the kind I find least objectionable and is the least abused. Most of the abuses of trademark law I've seen have been to try to silence public debate by taking over domain names and such.
Actually, from what I can tell, Spamhaus doesn't block dynamic IPs. There are blackhole lists that do.
I don't disagree with your first paragraph, which is why designing something that makes a system insecure in the face of a nieve user is very hard. I'm not faulting IE for this anyway. Again, you are reading your own biases into my post.
And you are also correct in your second paragraph. And that's a bit of a mistake on my part. I did read the article, but failed to sufficiently place myself in the mindset of a nieve user and realize that the concept of a 'Manual Install' would flummox them.
It's only FUD to people who decide what it says based on their own biases and an unwillingness to read the article. I clicked through to the article, and even though it renders very badly on my browser for some reason, the parts I could read told me the IE was getting a lot better.
Someone clicking 'yes' to everything is not that far off from a typical user's behavior. Most people have no idea what any of that stuff means and not much of a desire to learn. They just want the computer to do what they think they told it to.
So, you've seen this thing in the middle? What's it look like? Enquiring minds want to know!
You are possibly a troll, but it's rather standard to define the size of a black hole by the size of its event horizon. This is largely because we can't actually know anything about what there is behind the event horizon. Maybe there's a singularity there, and maybe there isn't. What we know of physics says there ought to be, but it seems impossible to observe, and trusting our physical theories in such extreme conditions is a big step of faith.
So, yes, in all the various articles about black holes that I've read, their size is defined by the size of their event horizon.
There are theories that posit the Universe is actually two-dimensional and that our experience of it as three-dimensional is actually more like a holographic projection of the two-dimensional reality. These theories are based on the relationship between a black hole's mass and its size that suggest that all the mass of a black hole is actually on the surface of the event horizon.
No, we're all so wrapped up in which club is the most popular that we don't actually really care how the country runs. Most of us are under the mistaken impression that our system can never go really wrong.
Take you, for instance. I bet you've managed to completely ignore the evidence mounting that Rumsfeld has personally authorized torture, that the war in Iraq was justified by supposed facts that the administration was well aware weren't true, that they leaked the name of a CIA agent for political gain, that there was plenty enough evidence lying around to figure out 9/11 was giong to happen and stop it before it did, that the government has been engaged in illegal spying operations on the American people, and a whole host of other injustices. You cover your ears and close your eyes and shout "Na na, I can't hear you!" like a petulant child while out of the other side of your face you invent all kinds of justifications that you think somehow condone behavior that's blatantly illegal. Not to mention the less flashy corporate corruption inherent in giving all the Iraq reconstruction deals to Haliburton.
At least the Democrats had the decency to be quietly embarassed about Bill Clinton's use of his office for personal gain (Tyson chicken (while he was governer), Whitewater and interns) and his lying on the stand. Republicans get in my face and shout "War is Peace!" "Freedom is Slavery!" "Criticism of the government is unpatriotic!" "Adultery is grounds for impeachment!". Lying on the stand is though, IMHO, but none of the Republicans seemed to be upset about that, perhaps because they didn't want to call attention to a behavior they seem to be so in love with themselves.
Not that I'm all that happy with the Democrats either. They want a nanny socialist state where everybody speaks very softly in order to avoid offending anyone. But I'd rather descend into that than the stick-up-your-ass facism the Republicans want, especially since they to a one seem to be in deep denial about it.
Ahh, the old "Don't blame our side, the other side does it too!" argument. It's strange how that argument works so poorly for little kids but seems to be the argument of choice for a political party.
Sponsored communities are bad because they look just like ordinary communties until you go look at them. I didn't pay to look at advertising. If someone on my friends page links to the stupid sponsored community, I'll end up going there and looking at the advertising. I pay LJ. I pay cold hard cash. I have a lot of data on their site. I have a big investment in them. It really annoys me that now there will be advertising there I can stumble across. I would never have started a blog on a site with advertising, I would've self-hosted it or something.
Their snarky "Well, you can just ignore it if you don't like it." is just ridiculous. I don't want to have to ignore it. I can ignore all the spam in my inbox to, but that doesn't mean its OK.
I agree that this is true. And it bothers me that this has happened to Microsoft. I will submit that they brought it on themselves though. Everybody knows that they received absolutely no substansive punishment in the US for their conviction on violating the Sherman Antitrust Act. So, I suspect that judges in these cases are really inclined to throw the book at Microsoft. I don't think it's right that judges are not being impartial in this way. But I think it's what's happening.
I do think that the complete lack of any kind of substansive punishment is a greater wrong.
You're also right about having to play the software patent game. That's perhaps the most evil thing about software patents. The MAD mentality it encourages which profits nobody but the patent office and patent lawyers.
Then clearly something is wrong, because if you are correct, and all the rules were followed, they led to a ridiculous and untenable outcome in this particular case.
I also don't recall having had to sign any little pieces of paper when I've been through customs to Canada. So I think that whole line is a bunch of BS you invented because you have some irrational feeling that authority is always right.
So, no pieces of paper mean that either the US standards (the 4th amendment) or the Canadian standards (discussed elsewhere in this thread) for searching people's belongings for stuff apply. Those standards were invented to prevent state harassment of citizenry and to provide a cap on what kind of consensual crime laws could be enforced by the state.
This is true. I use emacs and ipython as my Python IDE. They work fairly well, but don't look nearly as slick as Eclipse. There is IDLE and PyPE, but they are a lot less ambitious (or, from another perspective, overfeatured and bloated) than Eclipse. But, I wouldn't generally use them as I've rarely found that sort of development tool useful. And I've made a go of using them for a long time too because everybody else has raved so much about them. I've come to the conclusion that they prefer an illusion to reality.
But, I personally find Eclipse to be cumbersome and to do a great deal to obscure what's really going on. I find it highly amusing that a tool like that is all the fashion in Java. It reinforces my opinion of it as the new COBOL. A hand holding tool for programmers who don't really want to know how their computer actually does anything and want a tinkertoy programming environment that attempts to dumb down complicated things so they appear superficially simple.