So, if you have good email screening, then these viruses shouldn't be a problem, either.
I wish it were so. Ones you get a worm, it sends mail to people in your address book--- for example: your mom or your coworkers. These are the very people who are unlikely to have filtered mail from you (or your impersonator).
Fortunately, my mom dumps all my email unread and unopened.;^)
I've been thinking of writing something that uses postings to things like USENET, Slashdot, and so on to subtly encode things into. This would look just like ordinary traffic, but you could manipulate, say, the timestamp in the message header to get a small amount of data through. This would be very low bandwidth
Hidding the existance of a message is called steganography. Its more common to high the message in a single image or MP3 as they have more bits to obscure the payload. See http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~fapp2/stegano graphy (among others) for more info.
That is a very interesting report. But I'm not clear why you think XML will be a magic bullet, especially vis a vis IIOP. The central thesis of this article is that distributed computing is fundamentally harder than local computing in light of partial system failures and more difficult concurrency issues. They think this means we shouldn't even try to ever hide the locality of an object.
In the few years since they wrote that article, distributed systems really have taken off in a big way; especially with the web. And unless you are running in the process space of the database, distribution of transactions is your problem. So many of the problems they see with distributed systems are things you have to deal with to some extent anyway (concurrency and partial failures not least).
What has XML got to do with any of this? Its a resurgence of the message passing paradigm from a couple of shifts back. Maybe messages are better than objects--- so what. Its easy to map from one to the other so it can't be a big win. All the real issues are the same: settling on a happy DTD/IDL that people can live with, dealing with unstable servers, corrupted messages and partitioning the functionality among locations/ machines. In real life, they are both happier with one stateful server and a pile of (nearly) stateless clients.
In none of these things is it obvious to me how XML is better than IIOP (unless you are using a OO database). CORBA of today seems to be doing a reasonable thing--- making it possible to do distributed objects across interfaces which you know might be remote.
You may want to consider getting some insurance with a huge deducatable to protect your parents and their finances in case something really terrible happens to you. Many parents would sell their house to pay for health care for one of their children. Thats not a decision I'd like to force on my parents.
Yes: X -query foo.bar.com will bring up a login on foo.bar.com. IIRC, the way to get behavior most like the X servers for PCs/MACs is X -broadcast This will present the user with a list of machines on the subnet which allow remote login.
Of course, there is no real need to have individual journals, if the database can be searched flexibly.
For the pull model of reading papers, you are correct. However, journals also provide a useful push model: you get shown things you wouldn't otherwise have looked up. This helps people follow developments outside of a subspecialty.
This uses the same Kaffe Java virutal machine which was featured in the earlier story about Kaffe's MS extentions. It good to see a great product like Kaffe showing up in different contexts like that.
From the times article: Not everyone buys the Junger team's reasoning. Stewart A. Baker, a Washington-based lawyer and former general counsel at the National Security Agency, said that although he finds the Junger argument "plausible," he believes the government has a good response. Source code exists largely to allow for communication between people and computers, but the First Amendment exists to protect communication among people, he said.
Mr Baker is right--- even if this case is won its not the real issue. The real issue is protecting communication among people. All we want is to protect our communications, domestic or international.
Besides which, maybe exporting strong crypto isn't that great of an idea in the first place.
Locks are good, they help law abiding citizens avoid being the targets of crime. Not allowing crypto to be exported has the affect of making it inconvenient for US citizens and businesses to get good locks. Thats bad--- it not only costs time and money, it often means we don't have the locks we should.
..they've only offset the emmissions, not eliminated them...
At the car's site they have a suggestion which addresses this concern. To make liquid nitrogen we liquify air. If the liquefaction takes power plant exhaust as its input we can get liquid CO, CO2 etc as a byproduct of making the liquid nitrogen. Then you take these and put them in the empty coal mine shafts. Viola! Its almost totally emmision free. Its a very cool idea.:^)
Besides, Oracle probably came up with some funky test that will most definitely slow to a crawl on M$'s server... It's rather comical.
No, its a reasonable multitable join on a large dataset. It doesn't seem out of line to me. They did throw a big box at it--- which MS can't do. But then, that lack of scalability to huge hardware is the point.
They'd be better off designing a cheap 4-way or 8-way SMP board for x86 CPUs (preferably PII).
Wht the PII? The k6-3 article left me wondering why anyone buys PIIs--- Celerons are a fraction of the cost, from the same manufacturer and with identical performance. Is this just marketing? Are there no board that support SMP Celerons?
Slashdot Mirror
The CPlant isn't a Beowulf machine. It is running linux tho.
I wish it were so. Ones you get a worm, it sends mail to people in your address book--- for example: your mom or your coworkers. These are the very people who are unlikely to have filtered mail from you (or your impersonator).
Fortunately, my mom dumps all my email unread and unopened. ;^)
-Henry
It kinda a shame its gone. It was a swell quote, even when mangled...
Hidding the existance of a message is called steganography. Its more common to high the message in a single image or MP3 as they have more bits to obscure the payload. See http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~fapp2/stegano graphy (among others) for more info.
-Henry
That is a very interesting report. But I'm not clear why you think XML will be a magic bullet, especially vis a vis IIOP. The central thesis of this article is that distributed computing is fundamentally harder than local computing in light of partial system failures and more difficult concurrency issues. They think this means we shouldn't even try to ever hide the locality of an object.
In the few years since they wrote that article, distributed systems really have taken off in a big way; especially with the web. And unless you are running in the process space of the database, distribution of transactions is your problem. So many of the problems they see with distributed systems are things you have to deal with to some extent anyway (concurrency and partial failures not least).
What has XML got to do with any of this? Its a resurgence of the message passing paradigm from a couple of shifts back. Maybe messages are better than objects--- so what. Its easy to map from one to the other so it can't be a big win. All the real issues are the same: settling on a happy DTD/IDL that people can live with, dealing with unstable servers, corrupted messages and partitioning the functionality among locations/ machines. In real life, they are both happier with one stateful server and a pile of (nearly) stateless clients.
In none of these things is it obvious to me how XML is better than IIOP (unless you are using a OO database). CORBA of today seems to be doing a reasonable thing--- making it possible to do distributed objects across interfaces which you know might be remote.
You may want to consider getting some insurance with a huge deducatable to protect your parents and their finances in case something really terrible happens to you. Many parents would sell their house to pay for health care for one of their children. Thats not a decision I'd like to force on my parents.
Yes:
X -query foo.bar.com
will bring up a login on foo.bar.com. IIRC, the way to get behavior most like the X servers for PCs/MACs is
X -broadcast
This will present the user with a list of machines on the subnet which allow remote login.
For the pull model of reading papers, you are correct. However, journals also provide a useful push model: you get shown things you wouldn't otherwise have looked up. This helps people follow developments outside of a subspecialty.
This uses the same Kaffe Java virutal machine which was featured in the earlier story about Kaffe's MS extentions. It good to see a great product like Kaffe showing up in different contexts like that.
The user advantages of .deb include:
- suggested and recommended packages--- these are great when you don't know much about what you are installing
- easy of upgrade--- the system can automatically compare itself to the ftp archive(s) and update any out of date software.
-HenryMr Baker is right--- even if this case is won its not the real issue. The real issue is protecting communication among people. All we want is to protect our communications, domestic or international.
Locks are good, they help law abiding citizens avoid being the targets of crime. Not allowing crypto to be exported has the affect of making it inconvenient for US citizens and businesses to get good locks. Thats bad--- it not only costs time and money, it often means we don't have the locks we should.
At the car's site they have a suggestion which addresses this concern. To make liquid nitrogen we liquify air. If the liquefaction takes power plant exhaust as its input we can get liquid CO, CO2 etc as a byproduct of making the liquid nitrogen. Then you take these and put them in the empty coal mine shafts. Viola! Its almost totally emmision free. Its a very cool idea. :^)
tupper
No, its a reasonable multitable join on a large dataset. It doesn't seem out of line to me. They did throw a big box at it--- which MS can't do. But then, that lack of scalability to huge hardware is the point.
Mail might otherwise go in /var/spool/mail
or directly to the user's home directory.
Wht the PII? The k6-3 article left me wondering why anyone buys PIIs--- Celerons are a fraction of the cost, from the same manufacturer and with identical performance. Is this just marketing? Are there no board that support SMP Celerons?
What does this mean?