The point is *you* can't say too bad. They own the addresses and you don't have much of a say about it.
You dont' really understand how IP address allocation works, do you? It isn't like real estate. It isn't a free market. Entities are allocated address space based upon need, not what they can afford. Whether or not I can do anything about it is beyond the scope of this discussion, but suffice it to say that I am confident that I am correct on this, lame arguments from antiquity notwithstanding.
Anything that is limited is valuable. Supply and demand. Think real estate. They aren't going to make more ip addresses, at least not in IPv4. That makes the ip addresses valuable and that's why MIT et al are not going to willingly give them up.
If they choose to sit on the addresses, they (and everyone else) will just be forced to switch to IPV6 that much sooner. The real reason why thye might want to sit on the addresses is because they've probably already allocated rougly evenly throughout their block so it would cost them money to reconfigure and "compact" their usage. But I say too bad. We have CIDR now. Use it.
When they were handing out addresses they had no idea that this thing would be wildly popular. Why ration (reserve) when you have no inkling that you would need to. Do you reserve water today from your grocery? Why would you, after all there is plenty of water. However, fifty years from now someone is going to wonder why we didn't. See how the idea of plenty works?
If there was a severe drought and I had a swimming pool full of water, I would give some of it to my neighbor to drink/wash/water a garden. See how doing the right thing works? Poor planning in the past does not justify greed in the future. Rember, the Internet itself is/was planned. It is not a "free market." It should not be spoiled by capitalist greed.
Does a reward have to be something physical? I am merely pointing out that organizations like MIT and Dupont take risks to be no the cutting edge of technology. It doesn't make any sense for someone to whine about how unfair it is that the early adopters have some residual benefits while those that sat on the sidelines don't.
Please explain how it is a benefit to be over allocated IP addresses by a huge margin? Is it so they can save a couple manhours applying for more addresses if and when they run out? The companies don't gain anything by it. I could, perhaps, understand reserving address space for certain entities. But to actually allocate them and put them to use is just stupid. It isn't about being "unfair," it is just poor planning.
Would you feel the same way if Vint Cerf had some spare ip addresses by dint of his early work or is the ire only activated by some evil corporation? Careful about your choice, hypocrisy waits around the corner.
Who said anything about evil corporations? Hell yeah, if Vint Cert had many, many more addresses than he could possibly use, he should give them up. Is a large netblock an extension of one's penis or something? What the fuck? Just give up the damn addresses that wouldn't otherwise get used.
A "reward?" Is it some kind of trophy? It isn't like they get to do anything with it. I'm pretty sure that when it comes down to a real IP shortage, someone will put the heat on these organizations to hand over the addresses.
Who sets servers to use DHCP? That's what I want to know. Mind if I ask if you've actually migrated a whole company from one ISP to another using this method? Sounds great in theory, but I find it difficult to believe that it actually works out so smoothly in real life.
So, if Solaris will never compete seriously with xBSD and Linux, why would anyone steal its features?
I'm not sure what one necessarily has to do with the other. Plenty of OSes throughout history have had advanced features that other OSes didn't had but never competed serously.
And the assumption that once all those features have been stolen there would be "no compelling reason to run Solaris on x86" suggests there is a compelling reason now.
I'm not sure sure I would necesssarily call it compelling. I mean, if you know how to (or even care to) take adantage of something like DTrace, that might be compelling. Otherwise, Solaris x86 is about as desirable as it was 5 years ago.
It also suggests that as of Open Sourcing Solaris, Sun and the community are not going to add any more features to Solaris.... I am confused at your logic.,
No, you're just confused, period. The fact is that the Linux and BSD communities are much larger. Whatever new features Solaris adds will probably be incorporated into one or both of Linux and FreeBSD. That is, if they are even worth the trouble.
Personally, I see Solaris having all of its features "stolen" by going open source. Before you know it, LInux and FBSD will have the features, and there will be no compelling reason to run Solaris on x86. I have never seen solaris x86 as particularly competative product. The main reason I see people running Solaris is to take advantage of Sun's big iron (SPARC) systems. I don't think Solaris will ever be able to compete seriously with FBSD and Linux on x86 hardware.
At a significant performance penalty, of course. In the Mac world you almost have to do that kind of thing because getting a new mainboard is prohibitively expensive, if possible at all. PC mainboards are so cheap, I can't see any reason why you'd want to try to adapt a modern CPU to a much older board.
I don't know about hte rest of the stuff you mentioned, but I know that the increasing size of Antartic glaciers is accounted for by increased precipitation at the poles due to warmer global temperatures. Growing Antartic glaciers (and shrinking elsewhere) is to be expected... at least up to a point where even Antartica can't support such large scale glaciation.
While I dont' agree with a strict cost/benefit analysis, I do agree that a warmer globe could be a good thing (for most people). Consider the land that would become farmable. Canada, for example, would become a much more desirable place to live. And if I am not mistaken, higher temps would mean more overall evaporation/precipitation. Best of all, I would finally get to laugh at all those people who thought that moving to places like Arizona and southern California was a good idea.
Personally, I feel that reacting our impact on the evironment has less to do with the actual consequenses and more to do with who we are as people... as a culture. I believe it is better to conserve at whatever cost. I don't know that I would necessarily enforce conservation on a government level, but conservation should certainly be promoted as a Good Thing(tm). It is a virtue, in my opinion. A person who doesn't waste or pollute as much is more honorable in my eyes. It takes discipline to not indulge in wasteful practices simply because it is more convenient to use disposable items versus reuse. for example. Why do we just throw away perfectly good glass and plastic containers every day? Why does cat litter come in a perfectly reusable bucket? Yeah, I buy bulk cat litter and bring my own container, but most people don't. Why does water come in (disposable) containers which cost more to produce than the water itself is worth? It is just absurd.
Usually the "engine" of a computer includes the mainboard (and RAM). What are the chances that CPUs of the future will work with the same sockets/RAM that we currently have? No matter how modular they maek it, they won't support the Athlon 128 with a 2GHz FSB, or whatever. Even if the socket remains standard, there will be a faster front side bus or RAM type to support...
By the time I get around to upgrading to a new CPU, a new motherboard (and RAM) is required. I have never taken advantage of generic sockets/slots. If you are going to buy an Athlon 64, why not just buy a MB that specifically supports only it? My only guess is that ECS is just trying to cater to poential buyers with various different preferences for CPUs. I doubt that they expect many people will actually take advantage of the flexability. It is probably cheaper to manufacture a single design that will support many CPUs than to make boards that specialize in specific CPUs.
You mean the Nigerian scams are ACTUALLY coming from Nigeria? I thought the whole thing was completely made up buy some losers in Florida or something. Well, it is good to know that the scammers were at least honest about their nationality. Go figure.
Paying them more doesn't work because then business will have more incentive to offshore their research and universities won't be able to fund as much research. You'll actually lose science jobs by paying more. You lose jobs and you lose incentive to go into the field in the first place.
Last I checked, scientists don't get into science for the money. Maybe we should try cutting the pay of CEO's. Everyone wants an MBA these days....
What, specifically, about the UI makes virtual desktops less necessary? Please explain this, because I simply don't see it. Windows, MAc, and LInux have a common feature... windows. And lots of them. All three have "Alt-TAB" to cycle through the windows. All have the ability to minimize/hide the windows. If you are like me and hate cycling through windows to find the one you want, what is there on OS X that makes this unnecessary? There is Expose', but that requires that you visually find your application. If I already know what number desktop all my terminals are on, why should I have to look for them? On Linux, for example, Alt-1 always shows my terminals.
Indeed, VirtualDesktop does make OS X less usable. That is because it doesn't work like it does on unix.
First off all you argue that critics have a 'better' ear for music.
Please don't 'quote' me saying things that I didn't say, OK? I never said "better", I said "a certain ear that I don't have." There are few things more annoying in a written debate/discussion than a person who responds to a long post without quoting exactly what he/she is responding to. It is all to easy to distort (as you have) what the other peson has said. You are totally overracting to your initial "elitist" impression of me. and I am not at all interested in continuing this discussion.
handmade furniture would always be better than machine made simply because it is hand made (and not machine made) and then you apply this to music.
I did not say or imply this at all. I was specifically comparing cheap pressboard-type assemble yourself type furniture with hand made/designed solid wood furniture. I said nothing of machines. Machines can make fine furniture if quality materials and designs are used. But I'd still appreciate soemthing handmade more. Also, I explicity said that there are unskilled craftsmen, so it hand made isn't necessarily all that great. Same with music. Some, even many, indie goups and composers just don't have much skill.
Just because its formulaic doesn't mean its not genuine. Maybe I know what to expess, but I don't know how to express it, and as a result I turn to a formula where I can better potray my ideas. In this example think of poetry. (ie. Quatrain, which is a sort of formula (style) that is used to design how the idea is potrayed but doesn't define the ideas being potrayed)
The key difference between this and the type of formula that a record label might use is that the music formula is used to generate sales, not to express a creative impulse.
Most of all popular music is almost never forumlaic (even beyonce and britney spears consider what they do as art, and DO put time and effort into their work). Except for the subject matter, I almost never see a similarity between the songs of these artists. And remember subject matters are usually controlled by culture and current events (not record companies).
I disagree, having critically listened to a lot of pop music and having read a bit about how the industry works. I don't doubt that being a pop start is a lot of work. In the case of someone like Britney Spears, such stars spend a lot more time on things like choreography for live shows and they tend to let the song writters and record labels dictate the content. Even the stars themselves are often more concerned becoming famous than musical integrity.
Most pop bands are already making songs before the record companies sign them up, which means they're doing stuff in a genuine manner. By this I mean: they aren't mindless dolls that do everything the record companies tell them to.
Certainly "mindless dolls" is taking it to an unreasonable extreme.
The analogy doesn't apply because music is far more subjective (it sounds different to different people).
It is all, ultimately, subjective, but that doesn't mean we can't look at it critically and discuss subjective impressions.
What if I like the target furniture more because I like the minimalist design?
As I said in the previous post, there are reasons for buying Target furniture. I own plenty of it myself. But I still assert that much higher quality furniture can be found.
Why does that make me a 'bad quality' type person?
It isn't personal. You just don't appreciate good quality furniture like some people do. There are many areas in life where I concede that I am just not an insightful critic. I'm not even much of a music critic, but I recognize that there are people who are. I dont' always agree with them. I don't let them dictate what I like, but I recognize that they have a certain ear (or eye) that I don't have. Perhaps I worded it poorly originally. I should not have said that most people do not really enjoy music. I thik that most people do not critically listen to music and don't, perhaps, invest as much in it. For example, there are people who just think music is something you dance to... music should have a "good beat." There are others who really strive to find the deeper meanings and nuances in music.
The first works for hours and hours (but has no real talent) and comes up with nonsensical lyrics (at least to your ears). The other works for only 2 seconds and has something that makes you want to dance. Just because one put more hours into it d
You're naive if you think that a lot of popular music isn't produced using formulas to generate the most sales. If there is art there, it has been quite diluted. Keep in mind that I don't just say that all music that I don't like is crap. THere is plenty of music that I don't like which I would still consider quality or genuine. And there is even some low quality pop music that I enjoy from time to time.
Consider a slightly more clear example of quality vs. crap. Compare the pressboard furniture that you might find at a Walmart or Target with hand made real wood furniture. Would you not agree that the hand made stuff is generally of a higher quality than the Target stuff? I mean, even if you don't like the particular design of a hand made piece of furniture, you have to admit that something which is hand crafted with care is of a certain higher inherent quality than some mass produced, cheap Target piece. There are exceptions of course. Sometimes there are unskilled craftsmen who do bad work. Now, you might still prefer the cheap Target furniture because it is cheap and it serves its purpose (holding your books, for example) well enough. But don't you admire the hand crafted stuff just a little bit more?
Slashdot Mirror
You dont' really understand how IP address allocation works, do you? It isn't like real estate. It isn't a free market. Entities are allocated address space based upon need, not what they can afford. Whether or not I can do anything about it is beyond the scope of this discussion, but suffice it to say that I am confident that I am correct on this, lame arguments from antiquity notwithstanding.
-matthew
If they choose to sit on the addresses, they (and everyone else) will just be forced to switch to IPV6 that much sooner. The real reason why thye might want to sit on the addresses is because they've probably already allocated rougly evenly throughout their block so it would cost them money to reconfigure and "compact" their usage. But I say too bad. We have CIDR now. Use it.
When they were handing out addresses they had no idea that this thing would be wildly popular. Why ration (reserve) when you have no inkling that you would need to. Do you reserve water today from your grocery? Why would you, after all there is plenty of water. However, fifty years from now someone is going to wonder why we didn't. See how the idea of plenty works?
If there was a severe drought and I had a swimming pool full of water, I would give some of it to my neighbor to drink/wash/water a garden. See how doing the right thing works? Poor planning in the past does not justify greed in the future. Rember, the Internet itself is/was planned. It is not a "free market." It should not be spoiled by capitalist greed.
-matthew
Please explain how it is a benefit to be over allocated IP addresses by a huge margin? Is it so they can save a couple manhours applying for more addresses if and when they run out? The companies don't gain anything by it. I could, perhaps, understand reserving address space for certain entities. But to actually allocate them and put them to use is just stupid. It isn't about being "unfair," it is just poor planning.
Would you feel the same way if Vint Cerf had some spare ip addresses by dint of his early work or is the ire only activated by some evil corporation? Careful about your choice, hypocrisy waits around the corner.
Who said anything about evil corporations? Hell yeah, if Vint Cert had many, many more addresses than he could possibly use, he should give them up. Is a large netblock an extension of one's penis or something? What the fuck? Just give up the damn addresses that wouldn't otherwise get used.
-matthew
Can you imagine tech support for home routers?
"What is your assigned network number, ma'am?"
"My what? Oh that. Let me see..." *digs through papers* "...2-f-0-1 colon 3-b-f..."
"Ok, Ma'am, type that part in your browser."
"Ok, now what?"
"What is the MAC address of your router?"
"The WHAT?"
*sigh* "Turn the device over and find a number that hsa two digits numbers separated by colons..."
"Is 'AB' a number???"
"Ok, in your browser, type in 2-f-0-1 colon...."
You get the picture. What a pain!
-matthew
A "reward?" Is it some kind of trophy? It isn't like they get to do anything with it. I'm pretty sure that when it comes down to a real IP shortage, someone will put the heat on these organizations to hand over the addresses.
-matthew
Who sets servers to use DHCP? That's what I want to know. Mind if I ask if you've actually migrated a whole company from one ISP to another using this method? Sounds great in theory, but I find it difficult to believe that it actually works out so smoothly in real life.
-matthew
I'm not sure what one necessarily has to do with the other. Plenty of OSes throughout history have had advanced features that other OSes didn't had but never competed serously.
And the assumption that once all those features have been stolen there would be "no compelling reason to run Solaris on x86" suggests there is a compelling reason now.
I'm not sure sure I would necesssarily call it compelling. I mean, if you know how to (or even care to) take adantage of something like DTrace, that might be compelling. Otherwise, Solaris x86 is about as desirable as it was 5 years ago.
It also suggests that as of Open Sourcing Solaris, Sun and the community are not going to add any more features to Solaris.... I am confused at your logic.,
No, you're just confused, period. The fact is that the Linux and BSD communities are much larger. Whatever new features Solaris adds will probably be incorporated into one or both of Linux and FreeBSD. That is, if they are even worth the trouble.
-matthew
Personally, I see Solaris having all of its features "stolen" by going open source. Before you know it, LInux and FBSD will have the features, and there will be no compelling reason to run Solaris on x86. I have never seen solaris x86 as particularly competative product. The main reason I see people running Solaris is to take advantage of Sun's big iron (SPARC) systems. I don't think Solaris will ever be able to compete seriously with FBSD and Linux on x86 hardware.
-matthew
At a significant performance penalty, of course. In the Mac world you almost have to do that kind of thing because getting a new mainboard is prohibitively expensive, if possible at all. PC mainboards are so cheap, I can't see any reason why you'd want to try to adapt a modern CPU to a much older board.
-matthew
A dual core processor doesn't do you much good if you have the same, single bus to get to the RAM.
-matthew
I don't know about hte rest of the stuff you mentioned, but I know that the increasing size of Antartic glaciers is accounted for by increased precipitation at the poles due to warmer global temperatures. Growing Antartic glaciers (and shrinking elsewhere) is to be expected ... at least up to a point where even Antartica can't support such large scale glaciation.
-matthew
While I dont' agree with a strict cost/benefit analysis, I do agree that a warmer globe could be a good thing (for most people). Consider the land that would become farmable. Canada, for example, would become a much more desirable place to live. And if I am not mistaken, higher temps would mean more overall evaporation/precipitation. Best of all, I would finally get to laugh at all those people who thought that moving to places like Arizona and southern California was a good idea.
Personally, I feel that reacting our impact on the evironment has less to do with the actual consequenses and more to do with who we are as people... as a culture. I believe it is better to conserve at whatever cost. I don't know that I would necessarily enforce conservation on a government level, but conservation should certainly be promoted as a Good Thing(tm). It is a virtue, in my opinion. A person who doesn't waste or pollute as much is more honorable in my eyes. It takes discipline to not indulge in wasteful practices simply because it is more convenient to use disposable items versus reuse. for example. Why do we just throw away perfectly good glass and plastic containers every day? Why does cat litter come in a perfectly reusable bucket? Yeah, I buy bulk cat litter and bring my own container, but most people don't. Why does water come in (disposable) containers which cost more to produce than the water itself is worth? It is just absurd.
-matthew
Do think that, perhaps, more ice in Antartica might be explained by warmer global tempuratures causing more precipitation at the poles?
-matthew
Usually the "engine" of a computer includes the mainboard (and RAM). What are the chances that CPUs of the future will work with the same sockets/RAM that we currently have? No matter how modular they maek it, they won't support the Athlon 128 with a 2GHz FSB, or whatever. Even if the socket remains standard, there will be a faster front side bus or RAM type to support...
-matthew
By the time I get around to upgrading to a new CPU, a new motherboard (and RAM) is required. I have never taken advantage of generic sockets/slots. If you are going to buy an Athlon 64, why not just buy a MB that specifically supports only it? My only guess is that ECS is just trying to cater to poential buyers with various different preferences for CPUs. I doubt that they expect many people will actually take advantage of the flexability. It is probably cheaper to manufacture a single design that will support many CPUs than to make boards that specialize in specific CPUs.
-matthew
What's wrong with wasting a scammer's time?
-matthew
You mean the Nigerian scams are ACTUALLY coming from Nigeria? I thought the whole thing was completely made up buy some losers in Florida or something. Well, it is good to know that the scammers were at least honest about their nationality. Go figure.
-matthew
Paying them more doesn't work because then business will have more incentive to offshore their research and universities won't be able to fund as much research. You'll actually lose science jobs by paying more. You lose jobs and you lose incentive to go into the field in the first place.
Last I checked, scientists don't get into science for the money. Maybe we should try cutting the pay of CEO's. Everyone wants an MBA these days....
-matthew
What, specifically, about the UI makes virtual desktops less necessary? Please explain this, because I simply don't see it. Windows, MAc, and LInux have a common feature... windows. And lots of them. All three have "Alt-TAB" to cycle through the windows. All have the ability to minimize/hide the windows. If you are like me and hate cycling through windows to find the one you want, what is there on OS X that makes this unnecessary? There is Expose', but that requires that you visually find your application. If I already know what number desktop all my terminals are on, why should I have to look for them? On Linux, for example, Alt-1 always shows my terminals.
Indeed, VirtualDesktop does make OS X less usable. That is because it doesn't work like it does on unix.
-matthew
Does it run Linux?
Indeed. I'd probably rather see it become more like OS X. Maybe they should be asking Mac users.
-matthew
We've secretly replace their regular Windows desktop with Linux. Let's see what they think...
Sounds like an elaborate advertisement, eh?
-matthew
Please don't 'quote' me saying things that I didn't say, OK? I never said "better", I said "a certain ear that I don't have." There are few things more annoying in a written debate/discussion than a person who responds to a long post without quoting exactly what he/she is responding to. It is all to easy to distort (as you have) what the other peson has said. You are totally overracting to your initial "elitist" impression of me. and I am not at all interested in continuing this discussion.
-matthew
I did not say or imply this at all. I was specifically comparing cheap pressboard-type assemble yourself type furniture with hand made/designed solid wood furniture. I said nothing of machines. Machines can make fine furniture if quality materials and designs are used. But I'd still appreciate soemthing handmade more. Also, I explicity said that there are unskilled craftsmen, so it hand made isn't necessarily all that great. Same with music. Some, even many, indie goups and composers just don't have much skill.
Just because its formulaic doesn't mean its not genuine. Maybe I know what to expess, but I don't know how to express it, and as a result I turn to a formula where I can better potray my ideas. In this example think of poetry. (ie. Quatrain, which is a sort of formula (style) that is used to design how the idea is potrayed but doesn't define the ideas being potrayed)
The key difference between this and the type of formula that a record label might use is that the music formula is used to generate sales, not to express a creative impulse.
Most of all popular music is almost never forumlaic (even beyonce and britney spears consider what they do as art, and DO put time and effort into their work). Except for the subject matter, I almost never see a similarity between the songs of these artists. And remember subject matters are usually controlled by culture and current events (not record companies).
I disagree, having critically listened to a lot of pop music and having read a bit about how the industry works. I don't doubt that being a pop start is a lot of work. In the case of someone like Britney Spears, such stars spend a lot more time on things like choreography for live shows and they tend to let the song writters and record labels dictate the content. Even the stars themselves are often more concerned becoming famous than musical integrity.
Most pop bands are already making songs before the record companies sign them up, which means they're doing stuff in a genuine manner. By this I mean: they aren't mindless dolls that do everything the record companies tell them to.
Certainly "mindless dolls" is taking it to an unreasonable extreme.
The analogy doesn't apply because music is far more subjective (it sounds different to different people).
It is all, ultimately, subjective, but that doesn't mean we can't look at it critically and discuss subjective impressions.
What if I like the target furniture more because I like the minimalist design?
As I said in the previous post, there are reasons for buying Target furniture. I own plenty of it myself. But I still assert that much higher quality furniture can be found.
Why does that make me a 'bad quality' type person?
It isn't personal. You just don't appreciate good quality furniture like some people do. There are many areas in life where I concede that I am just not an insightful critic. I'm not even much of a music critic, but I recognize that there are people who are. I dont' always agree with them. I don't let them dictate what I like, but I recognize that they have a certain ear (or eye) that I don't have. Perhaps I worded it poorly originally. I should not have said that most people do not really enjoy music. I thik that most people do not critically listen to music and don't, perhaps, invest as much in it. For example, there are people who just think music is something you dance to... music should have a "good beat." There are others who really strive to find the deeper meanings and nuances in music.
The first works for hours and hours (but has no real talent) and comes up with nonsensical lyrics (at least to your ears). The other works for only 2 seconds and has something that makes you want to dance. Just because one put more hours into it d
You're naive if you think that a lot of popular music isn't produced using formulas to generate the most sales. If there is art there, it has been quite diluted. Keep in mind that I don't just say that all music that I don't like is crap. THere is plenty of music that I don't like which I would still consider quality or genuine. And there is even some low quality pop music that I enjoy from time to time.
Consider a slightly more clear example of quality vs. crap. Compare the pressboard furniture that you might find at a Walmart or Target with hand made real wood furniture. Would you not agree that the hand made stuff is generally of a higher quality than the Target stuff? I mean, even if you don't like the particular design of a hand made piece of furniture, you have to admit that something which is hand crafted with care is of a certain higher inherent quality than some mass produced, cheap Target piece. There are exceptions of course. Sometimes there are unskilled craftsmen who do bad work. Now, you might still prefer the cheap Target furniture because it is cheap and it serves its purpose (holding your books, for example) well enough. But don't you admire the hand crafted stuff just a little bit more?
Now apply this to music.
-matthew