Opensolaris is a great initiative, but is not ready for production use.
So it's now ready for production use (in general) because your particular mission-critical product's manufacturer (specifically) doesn't support it? Huh?
In a statement issued after the Orlando Sentinel posted Griffin's e-mail, the space agency administrator stressed that the memo alone lacked the appropriate context.
"The leaked internal email fails to provide the contextual framework for my remarks, and my support for the Administration's policies," Griffin said the NASA statement. "Administration policy is to retire the shuttle in 2010 and purchase crew transport from Russia until Ares and Orion are available."
This basically validates the accuracy of the article's source material (the email), although it does insist that relying on the information in the email alone would not respect the context it was written in. In short, you should have RTFA (which contains a lot more information than the original email), and your comment is idiotic and baseless.
Wow, that's one of the most informative comments I've seen on Slashdot in a while. I've tended to run distributed computing clients on servers during off-peak processing hours (typically at night), and it looks like that choice is both good for business and the environment. Thanks for the info!
Good point. I *do* have wiring, and could go with a net-only connection. It's been years since I've used home-based DSL. Thanks for the reminder that telephone service is rarely required anymore!
You're approaching this from a somewhat socialist perspective, I think. In the model we're discussing, the ISP sells a particular level of service for home users, setting a monthly bandwidth cap but not restricting the types of download services you can utilize on the network (Netflix movies, random torrents, whatever). If you want more download capacity, you purchase a higher tier of service.
There's no "forced upgrade" happening here. If a person is consuming more than 250 GB of bandwidth per month, he's using the connection in a manner that strongly differs from the average home user. He should (rightly) be required to purchase a higher level of service to meet his needs. This is precisely why I use business-class Internet service (I run home office based servers and download a LOT of ISO images each month).
Perhaps you misunderstood what I meant by "sharing." I was referring to the somewhat common practice of an individual obtaining Internet service, and then sharing it via wireless with multiple other separate households (perhaps splitting the monthly service bill).
If one of your top priorities is using your Internet connection for video downloads, and your ISP happens to be Comcast, you may find the 250 GB usage cap to be a bit uncomfortable...
I don't care where someone lives; I care about bots scraping content from my site in an abusive manner. I also care about spambots that abuse various resources on the site.
Unfortunately, I've found that restricting access by country code is the only efficient way of dealing with these problems. It doesn't eliminate all of the issues, but it does mean that in cases where abuse occurs I have a decent chance of my complaints actually being acted upon by the abuser's ISP. In other regions, specifically ones outside US/UK/AU jurisdiction, there's very little I can do to get offensive behavior stopped.
I don't have a specific set of pages for 800x600, but have been trying to modify all my page layouts to better handle lower resolution devices. The majority of my visitors are browsing at 1024x768 and higher, but I'd prefer to offer layouts that are usable by everyone where it's possible.
I'm using Google Analytics across the site to gather usage stats, which gives me a lot of nice information (including browser types and screen resolutions).
Thank you for the heads up! I've updated the GeoIP database, and added some more country code exceptions. Hopefully this will correct some of the problems.
How about supporting efforts to get Big Gov the heck out of the business? Let's face it: the Internet is a far cry from a public utility, and government enforced monopolies are criminal.
Slashdot Mirror
Don't get me wrong, I understood your meaning... it just could have been worded a bit better :).
Opensolaris is a great initiative, but is not ready for production use.
So it's now ready for production use (in general) because your particular mission-critical product's manufacturer (specifically) doesn't support it? Huh?
The Land of Sarcasm.
One dishonest professor does not a university make. Further citations are needed to back up your claim of Purdue's mediocrity.
127.0.0.1
Damning my ass. Bin Laden initially denied involvement in the attacks, only to very publicly acknowledge his involvement later, on multiple occasions.
I guess knee-jerk Bush bashing is more popular than I thought.
*I'm running on about 2 hours of sleep, so I could be way off the mark there.
You are not off the mark.
For those haven't been introduced to steel and its myriad properties (depending upon alloy composition), here's a background article for you.
Mods will probably consider modding you up as soon as you as you demonstrate a basic grasp of human nature and its consequences for political systems.
Congress could simply increase NASA's budget in the short term to handle the issue...
In a statement issued after the Orlando Sentinel posted Griffin's e-mail, the space agency administrator stressed that the memo alone lacked the appropriate context.
"The leaked internal email fails to provide the contextual framework for my remarks, and my support for the Administration's policies," Griffin said the NASA statement. "Administration policy is to retire the shuttle in 2010 and purchase crew transport from Russia until Ares and Orion are available."
This basically validates the accuracy of the article's source material (the email), although it does insist that relying on the information in the email alone would not respect the context it was written in. In short, you should have RTFA (which contains a lot more information than the original email), and your comment is idiotic and baseless.
Wow, that's one of the most informative comments I've seen on Slashdot in a while. I've tended to run distributed computing clients on servers during off-peak processing hours (typically at night), and it looks like that choice is both good for business and the environment. Thanks for the info!
Wow. I'm floored by your complete and utter inability to demonstrate basic reading comprehension.
Let me say it again: I Like The 250 GB Cap And Think It Is A Good Idea.
Is that clear?
Good point. I *do* have wiring, and could go with a net-only connection. It's been years since I've used home-based DSL. Thanks for the reminder that telephone service is rarely required anymore!
You're approaching this from a somewhat socialist perspective, I think. In the model we're discussing, the ISP sells a particular level of service for home users, setting a monthly bandwidth cap but not restricting the types of download services you can utilize on the network (Netflix movies, random torrents, whatever). If you want more download capacity, you purchase a higher tier of service.
There's no "forced upgrade" happening here. If a person is consuming more than 250 GB of bandwidth per month, he's using the connection in a manner that strongly differs from the average home user. He should (rightly) be required to purchase a higher level of service to meet his needs. This is precisely why I use business-class Internet service (I run home office based servers and download a LOT of ISO images each month).
Perhaps you misunderstood what I meant by "sharing." I was referring to the somewhat common practice of an individual obtaining Internet service, and then sharing it via wireless with multiple other separate households (perhaps splitting the monthly service bill).
Or people who are sharing their connection with others could do the sensible thing and upgrade to a business-class connection.
You're assuming only one (or maybe two) people are using that connection...
I actually don't have any 800x480s, but I have had 411 unique visitors in the last 30 days with screen resolutions set to 800x600.
Neat site you've got there, btw.
If one of your top priorities is using your Internet connection for video downloads, and your ISP happens to be Comcast, you may find the 250 GB usage cap to be a bit uncomfortable...
I don't care where someone lives; I care about bots scraping content from my site in an abusive manner. I also care about spambots that abuse various resources on the site.
Unfortunately, I've found that restricting access by country code is the only efficient way of dealing with these problems. It doesn't eliminate all of the issues, but it does mean that in cases where abuse occurs I have a decent chance of my complaints actually being acted upon by the abuser's ISP. In other regions, specifically ones outside US/UK/AU jurisdiction, there's very little I can do to get offensive behavior stopped.
I don't have a specific set of pages for 800x600, but have been trying to modify all my page layouts to better handle lower resolution devices. The majority of my visitors are browsing at 1024x768 and higher, but I'd prefer to offer layouts that are usable by everyone where it's possible.
I'm using Google Analytics across the site to gather usage stats, which gives me a lot of nice information (including browser types and screen resolutions).
Thank you for the heads up! I've updated the GeoIP database, and added some more country code exceptions. Hopefully this will correct some of the problems.
Funny how their stuff routinely fails to fail...
How about supporting efforts to get Big Gov the heck out of the business? Let's face it: the Internet is a far cry from a public utility, and government enforced monopolies are criminal.
I don't either :). That would be one of the inconveniences associated with obtaining DSL service...