1. Allows better control of what addresses end up on what subnet (e.g. I might want to have my servers on the 0:dead:beef:1 subnet and my clients on the 0:dead:beef:2 subnet) 2. Doesn't require me to manually reconfigure lots of IP addresses - set it once in DHCP and it's enough 3. Autoconfig doesn't guarantee a machine will have the same IP while DHCP will... And a few other reasons.
TLDR; Better security, more convenient to administer.
Consoles require all code to have been digitally signed by the console maker, and console makers such as Sony and Nintendo have categorically refused to sign code developed by a dedicated team of individuals working out of home offices.
This. The consoles aren't an open market. DRM-free games and homebrew cannot exist on them, for that would allow for rampant piracy. That's why they're different.
Simple. Every game, book, movie and song thrives by being copied.
By using draconian DRM, all you do is alienating your customer base, whom sooner or later will be bitten by the DRM bug and (quite rightfully so) will say "Screw you guys!" and start playing non-DRM games or listen to non-DRM music exclusively.
Long-term, DRM means noone will give a damn about your future products. The more internet-aware we get, the more open we become of the alternatives. People WILL prefer free over DRM, and therefore DRM is doomed to fail.
ATi and nVidia COULD pay them to work on it - But I'm pretty certain SW and HW patents as well as NDAs gets in the way.
Linux support is becoming more and more important every year. Sooner or later one company will cave in to the pressure from the Open Source community. And then we'll have our free booz- I mean, bikini bab- I mean, free por- uhm, graphics drivers.
Make a form that has ten captchas and ten input fields. Filling that out would take around 10 seconds after some practice. Add another 10 seconds for mistypes and waiting for the server to respond, tadah, all done! 2 seconds per captcha is much more reasonable. Which would bring those 16 hours down to 4000*2 seconds, or 8000 seconds, which is 133 minutes and 20 seconds, or 2 hours, 13 minutes and 20 seconds. Add in a pee break and you're at 140 minutes for 4k captchas.
So 10k captchas for one person in one day is far from impossible. You just need to keep worker motivation up.
* Set the CSS property to "display : none;" * Hide it behind a div using CSS z-index * Hide it off-screen by using absolute positioning
Of course, all of these are also attainable by setting them with JavaScript. Spambots would basicly need something like Firebug to get around these techniques, especially the last one.
Big sites will still be a target, but small sites would be rather protected.
Either the cost of paying all licenses over a five-year period outweigh the cost of retraining staff on an alternative software and any eventual modifications on it, or it doesn't. If it doesn't, you should seriously consider hiring a few coders to make the neccessary adaptions to the software you'll be using.
But would you have paid the money if you couldn't have downloaded the movie, or just said "Screw it" and went out to watch a rental, or wait a couple of years when it's available in the bargain bin?
And then we're not even touching on the other end - suppose I have a VHS tape of a few disney movies. My VHS is long since thrown out with the rest of my teenage junk - only kept a few mementos. Why do I have to pay again for stuff I already own?
If people need a unified address to find me, it is my email address. Now, I've long suggested there should be a universal protocol for finding people with IM. Instead of seperate accounts across multiple networks, it should be your email address.
There already exists such an unified infrastructure, it's called XMPP. Most other vendors will jump on board soon, Facebook probably also will (heck, it's XMPP for it's chat already, only proprietary XMPP).
Like seriously, what self-respecting carrier will sit by and let this idly happen? Their carrier status will dissappear overnight, they will be a commodity everyone is, and they'll lose control of the power, money and status they now receive.... Yeah. It's not that it's a bad idea - It's that there is a massive Hydra to battle with many heads that can poison the minds of even the most idealistic phone makers...
Actually, I disagree... The Pirate Party is everything but a one-hit wonder. However in the world of politics, things move slowly, by neccessity.
The Pirate Party made a really bad election this year, but that does not seem to have demotivated any of it's members. If anything, it has made them even more interested in continuing the fight. The fact that members from other parties join PP here in sweden only serve to prove that PP is here to stay, IMO.
So a one-hit wonder? Nay. Not when their core issues are so important. But they do need help, and lots of it...
Or you make a deal with your programming-savy friend for fixing his bed that has been broken for two weeks, and in return he fixes that particular bug that irks you so much.
Open source gives you lots more options than closed source. Sure, the companies developing their products still might be the one fixing the most bugs in their products, but if you need to alter their products for any reason, now you can. Pretty much how, while you might fix a few things with the car yourself (like changing tires or switching oil), you could also turn it over to a mechanic or put it in on service from the company you bought it from.
Having options is never a bad thing, as long as those options come with sane defaults.
It might not get fixed but atleast you have the option of
a) paying any coder to fix it, be it with cash, sex, coca cola or any other form of goods or services. b) fix it yourself c) hope someone else fixes your problem
You don't get that for binary blobs. The options there are
a) pay the company to fix it for you with your hard-earned money b) hope the company fixes it for you
Usually, in the case of international tech corps, you can't afford a) so only b) remains.
>> Except that Microsoft's grip on the PC Desktop market is slowly but surely slipping away.
> They said that 10 years ago, but it hasn't made any noticable impact yet.
It has made an impact. Today Linux is a viable alternative, and CEOs everywhere are aware of the alternative even though they may not choose to employ it.
>> Except that Linux is being requested more and more, with no sign of stopping.
> Less and less you mean? Dell have actually just stopped shipping machines with Ubuntu as nobody is ordering them anymore. According to my own stats, the percentage of people visiting my websites who are running linux is falling - not rising. Perhaps you live in a country where it's more popular - but it seems to be dying here in the UK.
My company is getting so swamped with orders that we can barely keep up with the demand. Granted, we're a Linux/Open Source shop, but compared from a year ago our customers have nearly doubled. So what if Dell doesn't sell Linux desktops? The future is in web apps, and there Linux rules supreme. So yes, the demand is growing from what I see.
>> Except that, outside the PC Desktop and XBox, Microsoft has at most 20-25% of the market.
> Not sure where you get that from! They have a 65% share of the server market for a start. src. Your figures might be correct for *web servers* perhaps, but certainly not for the server market as a whole.
How did Reuters come up with that number? By counting number of sold units? Well, got news for you - There are hundreds of thousands of servers out there that hasn't cost their owners a penny. Are those counted as well? Distros like Debian does not cost a penny to install - are those also counted? Not saying you're wrong, but I'm very sceptical of the numbers you've provided.
>> Except that C# is a ticking time bomb that will either go free
> Huh?! Unlike Java, C# is a totally open and free language - it's a public standard just like C and C++.
Criticism of the "free" part is plenty. Even ignoring the controversial patent disputes, there are the facts that C# is still controlled largely by Microsoft and that there are several non-standard core extensions that are only available in Microsofts own implementation of it. Calling C# free is like calling OOXML a worthy ISO standard; it might be true on paper, but in spirit, it isn't. Atleast, that's how I interpret it.
And, yeah, Java is also free nowadays. GPL implementation and all that.
Yes because it's just commercial insanity to back the fastest rising programming language produced by the market leader who has by far the biggest market share... Seems to have worked out OK for the vast majority of companies that have done it though. I'll stick with C# thank you (despite being trained in C++ and Java) - because that's where all the jobs are at the moment, which is kind of relevant when considering a career.
Except that Linux is being requested more and more, with no sign of stopping.
Except that Microsoft's grip on the PC Desktop market is slowly but surely slipping away.
Except that, outside the PC Desktop and XBox, Microsoft has at most 20-25% of the market.
Except that C# is a ticking time bomb that will either go free or collapse with Microsoft's empire.
Learn it if you wish. I know I'd rather put my money on something that is easy to port.
Of course the cost is way too high right now.
And back in the 1950s, had you told anyone that everyone and their dog would have their own personal computer, they'd have laughed at you. A computer at that time would cost about $150k, if not more. And probably come with it's own set of technicians, too. I have no doubt that these skeletons will go lower in price as time move on, to eventually cost only 5k-10k, maybe even less. So, yeah it costs too much right now. But that doesn't stop it from being practical and a great advance in science.
So I assume you will never move or switch locations to a place with lesser bandwidth?
Also, many places have high bandwidth yet also disconnect spikes. You play a great game for an hour, then bam, two minutes downtime. You can download a 10 GB game in 30 minutes with no problems whatsoever, but at peak hours it's impossible to play due to everyone leeching bandwidth. Etc.
It is a more complex issue than you think. 'Nuff said.
I'd pay for the ROMs I download... If I could play, say, Seiken Densetsu 3 on the Pandora, I would get it. Or Fire Emblem: Seisen no Keifuu. Alas, these games are in a language I do not understand, and in a format long since dead commercially. Any money I would pay for these games through the usual channels would not benefit the developers in any way, shape or form. So I don't really find it morally wrong to play these old games on an emulator.
Using an analogy, it's like going to the back alley and find a nice old cupboard that someone threw out. With just a little bit of restoration will serve for many years to come. It's obviously junk, else it wouldn't be in the back alley. So what's wrong with me taking it then?
I only have to look at the product of bottled water to prove that, yes, there is a way to compete with free. You can get tap water for free (or next to it), can you not? So yes, you can and *have to* compete with free. How to do it? Brand value, quality downloads, there are quite a few ways to do it actually. So I stand by my belief; the media companies have to start looking at TPB as competitors if they want to survive. However they are too blinded by greed to see this.
And, sure, it's their right not to go global. It's also their right to charge $500 for every song. But will a consumer buy a song for 500 USD? No. No they won't. Will a consumer sit idly and wait for a movie for six months, a movie that their oversea friends say is all the rage, when they can get it from the bittorrent sites today? No they won't. Entitlement? No. Market forces and basic economics, definitely.
E.O.D, and thanks. I fear we'll have to agree to disagree here.
The torrent sites are competitors, no question about that. Denying it is like saying "Oh, automobiles aren't competing with horses. Why is that? Becuase I have this law that outlaws automobiles." And as soon as intellectual property laws gets reformed (they will, it's only a matter of time), they'll compete legally.
And, why limit yourself to a single region, when you can have the entire world for a market? Sure, if you're say, a producer focusing in Swedish music, your customer base will be limited to mostly people understanding Swedish. But that's not an excuse to limit yourself to only Sweden. By letting people abroad buy your music, you lose nothing and gain a few more dollars in the process. It's not exactly as if you have to cater extra to those people; just give them a means to purchase your product, and they will be more than happy to. It's marketing 101 stuff here...
With regards to b), sorry. Generally speaking from experience:
* Pirated copy does not require me to input any product key * Pirated copy does not require me to have the CD in the tray (thus wearing on the CD, thus making it die) * Pirated copy does not mysteriously "not work" if I happen to have daemon tools installed (a tool I use for legitimate purposes) * Pirated copy is, in general, much less hassle than the real product
Thus, I draw the conclusion that the pirated copy is superior. I'm only speaking for personal experience however, so YMMV.
With regards to c) and d): Why am I supposed to wait two years for a TV show to hit the European networks when I can enjoy it, now? Why am I supposed to wait for six months for a movie to come out in Europe when I can see it today? Who are you to tell me what information I can and cannot access? And what makes gaming any different from movies, when it comes to distribution?
Face it. Internet made information global. When it comes to nation borders, they don't exist anymore. It's not a question of entitlement. I don't have a god-given right to enjoy all this information for free. But if the information already exists, for free, and that is the only way to get it, then I will not feel guilty.
To use your analogy: If I'm hungry, and you won't accept perfectly good cash for your fine roast beef, then screw you. I'll go eat at my mom's place where I can have roast beef for free, which is my god given right. That is to say, if you won't let me buy your roast beef I'll just go to your competitor which just so happens to provide roast beef for free. Maybe she won't always provide it, like you will, and maybe she won't always have the best quality, like you will, but hey, atleast I won't be hungry. And I might just discover some other kind of beef as well that I even might like better, making me realise that I don't need roast beef in the first place. And THAT is the biggest mistake any business could make.
Slashdot Mirror
Why DHCP? Because:
1. Allows better control of what addresses end up on what subnet (e.g. I might want to have my servers on the 0:dead:beef:1 subnet and my clients on the 0:dead:beef:2 subnet) ... And a few other reasons.
2. Doesn't require me to manually reconfigure lots of IP addresses - set it once in DHCP and it's enough
3. Autoconfig doesn't guarantee a machine will have the same IP while DHCP will
TLDR; Better security, more convenient to administer.
Elbereth wrote:
How are consoles different?
Consoles require all code to have been digitally signed by the console maker, and console makers such as Sony and Nintendo have categorically refused to sign code developed by a dedicated team of individuals working out of home offices.
This. The consoles aren't an open market. DRM-free games and homebrew cannot exist on them, for that would allow for rampant piracy. That's why they're different.
But consoles are a different ballpark alltogether.
My argument is "Given a choice, people will prefer DRM-free games". If all games have DRM, then they are hardly given a choice, now are they?
Simple. Every game, book, movie and song thrives by being copied.
By using draconian DRM, all you do is alienating your customer base, whom sooner or later will be bitten by the DRM bug and (quite rightfully so) will say "Screw you guys!" and start playing non-DRM games or listen to non-DRM music exclusively.
Long-term, DRM means noone will give a damn about your future products. The more internet-aware we get, the more open we become of the alternatives. People WILL prefer free over DRM, and therefore DRM is doomed to fail.
ATi and nVidia COULD pay them to work on it - But I'm pretty certain SW and HW patents as well as NDAs gets in the way.
Linux support is becoming more and more important every year. Sooner or later one company will cave in to the pressure from the Open Source community. And then we'll have our free booz- I mean, bikini bab- I mean, free por- uhm, graphics drivers.
15 seconds per captcha?
Make a form that has ten captchas and ten input fields. Filling that out would take around 10 seconds after some practice. Add another 10 seconds for mistypes and waiting for the server to respond, tadah, all done! 2 seconds per captcha is much more reasonable. Which would bring those 16 hours down to 4000*2 seconds, or 8000 seconds, which is 133 minutes and 20 seconds, or 2 hours, 13 minutes and 20 seconds. Add in a pee break and you're at 140 minutes for 4k captchas.
So 10k captchas for one person in one day is far from impossible. You just need to keep worker motivation up.
Yep.
A few of my favorites;
* Set the CSS property to "display : none;"
* Hide it behind a div using CSS z-index
* Hide it off-screen by using absolute positioning
Of course, all of these are also attainable by setting them with JavaScript. Spambots would basicly need something like Firebug to get around these techniques, especially the last one.
Big sites will still be a target, but small sites would be rather protected.
You are aware that you can just select the entire fleet and press the hotkey numerous times I hope?
It all boils down to cost.
Either the cost of paying all licenses over a five-year period outweigh the cost of retraining staff on an alternative software and any eventual modifications on it, or it doesn't. If it doesn't, you should seriously consider hiring a few coders to make the neccessary adaptions to the software you'll be using.
But would you have paid the money if you couldn't have downloaded the movie, or just said "Screw it" and went out to watch a rental, or wait a couple of years when it's available in the bargain bin? And then we're not even touching on the other end - suppose I have a VHS tape of a few disney movies. My VHS is long since thrown out with the rest of my teenage junk - only kept a few mementos. Why do I have to pay again for stuff I already own?
If people need a unified address to find me, it is my email address. Now, I've long suggested there should be a universal protocol for finding people with IM. Instead of seperate accounts across multiple networks, it should be your email address.
There already exists such an unified infrastructure, it's called XMPP. Most other vendors will jump on board soon, Facebook probably also will (heck, it's XMPP for it's chat already, only proprietary XMPP).
Or you could get a laptop small enough to balance on one leg. Like, well, most 10-12".
Like seriously, what self-respecting carrier will sit by and let this idly happen? Their carrier status will dissappear overnight, they will be a commodity everyone is, and they'll lose control of the power, money and status they now receive. ... Yeah. It's not that it's a bad idea - It's that there is a massive Hydra to battle with many heads that can poison the minds of even the most idealistic phone makers...
Actually, I disagree... The Pirate Party is everything but a one-hit wonder. However in the world of politics, things move slowly, by neccessity.
The Pirate Party made a really bad election this year, but that does not seem to have demotivated any of it's members. If anything, it has made them even more interested in continuing the fight. The fact that members from other parties join PP here in sweden only serve to prove that PP is here to stay, IMO.
So a one-hit wonder? Nay. Not when their core issues are so important. But they do need help, and lots of it...
Or you make a deal with your programming-savy friend for fixing his bed that has been broken for two weeks, and in return he fixes that particular bug that irks you so much.
Open source gives you lots more options than closed source. Sure, the companies developing their products still might be the one fixing the most bugs in their products, but if you need to alter their products for any reason, now you can. Pretty much how, while you might fix a few things with the car yourself (like changing tires or switching oil), you could also turn it over to a mechanic or put it in on service from the company you bought it from.
Having options is never a bad thing, as long as those options come with sane defaults.
It might not get fixed but atleast you have the option of
a) paying any coder to fix it, be it with cash, sex, coca cola or any other form of goods or services.
b) fix it yourself
c) hope someone else fixes your problem
You don't get that for binary blobs. The options there are
a) pay the company to fix it for you with your hard-earned money
b) hope the company fixes it for you
Usually, in the case of international tech corps, you can't afford a) so only b) remains.
>> Except that Microsoft's grip on the PC Desktop market is slowly but surely slipping away.
> They said that 10 years ago, but it hasn't made any noticable impact yet.
It has made an impact. Today Linux is a viable alternative, and CEOs everywhere are aware of the alternative even though they may not choose to employ it.
>> Except that Linux is being requested more and more, with no sign of stopping.
> Less and less you mean? Dell have actually just stopped shipping machines with Ubuntu as nobody is ordering them anymore. According to my own stats, the percentage of people visiting my websites who are running linux is falling - not rising. Perhaps you live in a country where it's more popular - but it seems to be dying here in the UK.
My company is getting so swamped with orders that we can barely keep up with the demand. Granted, we're a Linux/Open Source shop, but compared from a year ago our customers have nearly doubled. So what if Dell doesn't sell Linux desktops? The future is in web apps, and there Linux rules supreme. So yes, the demand is growing from what I see.
>> Except that, outside the PC Desktop and XBox, Microsoft has at most 20-25% of the market.
> Not sure where you get that from! They have a 65% share of the server market for a start. src. Your figures might be correct for *web servers* perhaps, but certainly not for the server market as a whole.
How did Reuters come up with that number? By counting number of sold units? Well, got news for you - There are hundreds of thousands of servers out there that hasn't cost their owners a penny. Are those counted as well? Distros like Debian does not cost a penny to install - are those also counted? Not saying you're wrong, but I'm very sceptical of the numbers you've provided.
>> Except that C# is a ticking time bomb that will either go free
> Huh?! Unlike Java, C# is a totally open and free language - it's a public standard just like C and C++.
Criticism of the "free" part is plenty. Even ignoring the controversial patent disputes, there are the facts that C# is still controlled largely by Microsoft and that there are several non-standard core extensions that are only available in Microsofts own implementation of it. Calling C# free is like calling OOXML a worthy ISO standard; it might be true on paper, but in spirit, it isn't. Atleast, that's how I interpret it.
And, yeah, Java is also free nowadays. GPL implementation and all that.
Yes because it's just commercial insanity to back the fastest rising programming language produced by the market leader who has by far the biggest market share... Seems to have worked out OK for the vast majority of companies that have done it though. I'll stick with C# thank you (despite being trained in C++ and Java) - because that's where all the jobs are at the moment, which is kind of relevant when considering a career.
Except that Linux is being requested more and more, with no sign of stopping.
Except that Microsoft's grip on the PC Desktop market is slowly but surely slipping away.
Except that, outside the PC Desktop and XBox, Microsoft has at most 20-25% of the market.
Except that C# is a ticking time bomb that will either go free or collapse with Microsoft's empire.
Learn it if you wish. I know I'd rather put my money on something that is easy to port.
Of course the cost is way too high right now. And back in the 1950s, had you told anyone that everyone and their dog would have their own personal computer, they'd have laughed at you. A computer at that time would cost about $150k, if not more. And probably come with it's own set of technicians, too. I have no doubt that these skeletons will go lower in price as time move on, to eventually cost only 5k-10k, maybe even less. So, yeah it costs too much right now. But that doesn't stop it from being practical and a great advance in science.
So I assume you will never move or switch locations to a place with lesser bandwidth?
Also, many places have high bandwidth yet also disconnect spikes. You play a great game for an hour, then bam, two minutes downtime. You can download a 10 GB game in 30 minutes with no problems whatsoever, but at peak hours it's impossible to play due to everyone leeching bandwidth. Etc.
It is a more complex issue than you think. 'Nuff said.
Yes.
I'd pay for the ROMs I download... If I could play, say, Seiken Densetsu 3 on the Pandora, I would get it. Or Fire Emblem: Seisen no Keifuu. Alas, these games are in a language I do not understand, and in a format long since dead commercially. Any money I would pay for these games through the usual channels would not benefit the developers in any way, shape or form. So I don't really find it morally wrong to play these old games on an emulator.
Using an analogy, it's like going to the back alley and find a nice old cupboard that someone threw out. With just a little bit of restoration will serve for many years to come. It's obviously junk, else it wouldn't be in the back alley. So what's wrong with me taking it then?
I only have to look at the product of bottled water to prove that, yes, there is a way to compete with free. You can get tap water for free (or next to it), can you not? So yes, you can and *have to* compete with free. How to do it? Brand value, quality downloads, there are quite a few ways to do it actually. So I stand by my belief; the media companies have to start looking at TPB as competitors if they want to survive. However they are too blinded by greed to see this.
And, sure, it's their right not to go global. It's also their right to charge $500 for every song. But will a consumer buy a song for 500 USD? No. No they won't. Will a consumer sit idly and wait for a movie for six months, a movie that their oversea friends say is all the rage, when they can get it from the bittorrent sites today? No they won't. Entitlement? No. Market forces and basic economics, definitely.
E.O.D, and thanks. I fear we'll have to agree to disagree here.
The torrent sites are competitors, no question about that. Denying it is like saying "Oh, automobiles aren't competing with horses. Why is that? Becuase I have this law that outlaws automobiles." And as soon as intellectual property laws gets reformed (they will, it's only a matter of time), they'll compete legally.
And, why limit yourself to a single region, when you can have the entire world for a market? Sure, if you're say, a producer focusing in Swedish music, your customer base will be limited to mostly people understanding Swedish. But that's not an excuse to limit yourself to only Sweden. By letting people abroad buy your music, you lose nothing and gain a few more dollars in the process. It's not exactly as if you have to cater extra to those people; just give them a means to purchase your product, and they will be more than happy to. It's marketing 101 stuff here...
With regards to b), sorry. Generally speaking from experience:
* Pirated copy does not require me to input any product key
* Pirated copy does not require me to have the CD in the tray (thus wearing on the CD, thus making it die)
* Pirated copy does not mysteriously "not work" if I happen to have daemon tools installed (a tool I use for legitimate purposes)
* Pirated copy is, in general, much less hassle than the real product
Thus, I draw the conclusion that the pirated copy is superior. I'm only speaking for personal experience however, so YMMV.
With regards to c) and d): Why am I supposed to wait two years for a TV show to hit the European networks when I can enjoy it, now? Why am I supposed to wait for six months for a movie to come out in Europe when I can see it today? Who are you to tell me what information I can and cannot access? And what makes gaming any different from movies, when it comes to distribution?
Face it. Internet made information global. When it comes to nation borders, they don't exist anymore. It's not a question of entitlement. I don't have a god-given right to enjoy all this information for free. But if the information already exists, for free, and that is the only way to get it, then I will not feel guilty.
To use your analogy: If I'm hungry, and you won't accept perfectly good cash for your fine roast beef, then screw you. I'll go eat at my mom's place where I can have roast beef for free, which is my god given right. That is to say, if you won't let me buy your roast beef I'll just go to your competitor which just so happens to provide roast beef for free. Maybe she won't always provide it, like you will, and maybe she won't always have the best quality, like you will, but hey, atleast I won't be hungry. And I might just discover some other kind of beef as well that I even might like better, making me realise that I don't need roast beef in the first place. And THAT is the biggest mistake any business could make.