The other day when i upgraded work's few windows machines, i found out that there are 2 patches, with the same name, of different size. One works for IE5.01 sp1, the other for IE5.5 sp1. And ONLY the english version.
So, not only do you need the patch, you also need to upgrade to a newer, and switch to an english version.
Further more, if you already run IE5.5 in a non-english version, you're fucked. And if you dont have 62MB free on drive C: you are fucked too.
Dear microsoft, it's great you make it so EASY to be a sysadmin, and apply patches. NOT!
You seem to describe linux NOT using ipfilter, but making their own, iptables, as a bad idea. It might not neassesarely be a bad idea. I will write a few analogies, but basicaly my response is Competition is good If you buy into that, you dont have to read on, if not, please do.
Why even have Linux in the first place, we have BSD. But wait, there is 3 BSD's, (there was 4), BSDi/FreeBSD, OpenBSD and netBSD?? But BSD is just a further devellopment of earlier *nix systems (i'm not too knowledgeable of the unix history). But Unix was built on Multics, so lets keep that, or better yet, some system before that.
Why do we have xx different OS's ?? One should be enough! Why do we have xx different webservers ?? One should be enough! Why do we have xx different GUI's ?? One should be enough! Why do we have xx (2) different chipmakers ?? One should be enough! Why do we have xx harddrive makers ?? Why do we have xx monitor makers ?? [high pitched voice getting estatic] kabinets? keyboards? cola? beer? car? clothes? tvchannels? [voice cramming over] political views ?? [breating normal] Because, competition is good It's good having choice, not everyone likes the same, or chooses the same over something else. Naturaly we can work together, and we should, but that doesnt mean one implementation, one manefacturer,... is a bad idea. Multiple choices enhances life and survival (imagien living from just one sort of food, and it becomming extingt).
So, be thankfull for being able to choose, and not having the goverment, or some company choose for you. While the first is becomming less and less apparent in the world, the second is becoming more and more widespread. And the worst part is that people doesnt seem to care:(
ion++
Re:Artificial Black Holes
on
Stop, Light.
·
· Score: 1
Hollywood tought everybody that (american) cars explode on impact.
Just dont hit anything and your blackhole powered car will be fine.
That doesnt matter, what matters if you think, or marketing can make you think you need it.
The article mentioned using this in camera's with 80mm discs (a little smaller than a floppy), or 60mm in portable music players. In these sizes the disc could hold 650 and 200MB, which is quite nice for that sort of stuff. So what does it matter if the price is 10 og 20$ for a disc. Compared to the 85-90$ for a 64MB compactflash and 50$ for a 32MB. (pricewatch.com) Eventualy the price for these discs might even hit the 1$ a regular cdr is these days, i doubt compact flash will be that low.
your 1-4 points: if these discs can store 3 bits, and are intented to be used with regular cd-rom laser technology, clearly the same discs can be burnt using just 1 of those 3 bits. Remember, 3 bits means 8 different levels of light. If you can have 8, you can also have 2 levels of light, so you should be able to use these advances disc in your old cdr, though only burning the regular 650MB. This would mean that the CDR disc manefactures might only ship these discs. So, every CDR you buy has the ability to store 650MB, or with the right drive, 3x 650MB = 1950MB or almost 2GB. If the media supports it, and is as cheap, or almost as cheap as the old cdr's, which would you buy ?? just in case. The articly further mentions just a software update. If thats all it takes you just need new firmware, possibly only new cdr creation software. This is where the real advantage comes in. Naturaly a firmware update doesnt let cd-rom drive manefactures sell new units, but should they choose to do so, you should possibly be able to use a firmware update. Some companies are already creating new firmware for the drives, so why not add this feature, if it isnt so hard. It makes the manefacture able to destingius itself from the others and say to you "we give you support and features for many years, not abandoning you the minute you walk out the door." So, if they do this, you get a nicer picture of them, and a higher reason to buy their eq next time.
I've been in the CD-RW-making business for about three years and I'm at the head of a R&D division. I have one sentence for you all: this won't work.
I have one sentence for you pal: "You arent seeing the potential in this"
When you have three layers of any dye except chlarodium, they will eventually cave in making one track of complete gibberish. This is because over time (1-3yrs), dyes will accumulate heat and melt once enough is accumulated.
So ?? How many discs are you burning that you dont expect to hold a very long time ?? lets see what data are usualy put on discs
linux - dont care if it last only 3 months, when the disc is gone, there's a new linux dist.
games - so what if it doesnt last a year, next year there's a new hot game in town
music - it would be nice with a LONG lifetime
pictures - same as music
movies - in 3 years you wont accept seeing anything less than DVD, the details just arent good enough
backup - a LONG lifetime is good
The article talked about putting this into camera's and mp3 players / "walkmens" / "discmen" / "minidiscman" /... Sure a long lifetime would be nice, but some people, i know i do, usualy just listens to the lastest music the radio plays. So a short lifetime doesnt matter if the disc is cheap.
So, what does a marketing dude see from this... Cool 2 markets, one for casual data where the lifetime doesnt matter that much, and one for importent data where the lifetime is importent. So, you sell the 1-3 years cheap, knowing you'll sell lots of these. The others have longer lifetime. And since they offer an extra value, you can sell these for more money. Though they might be more expensive to make, they shouldnt be that much more expensive. Imagien having cd's which could hold data until my kids gets old... i bet people wouldnt mind paying 10$ for a disc that lasts this long or perhaps even 20$. Remember you dont have to use the long term discs. I doubt it would matter much if they only hold the usualy 650MB for the long term discs. (at least for the next decade or so) Read my other replies, i think i happened to write it twice, about why these discs can also hold 1bit instead of 3bit.
The article seems to give the impression that only a firmware change is enough to make existing cd drives and burners the ability to burn these new discs. However, firmware updates doesnt give people any reason to buy new eq.
However, one of the real advantages of this should be that if you can store 3 bits at each "pixel" surely you can also store 1 bit. This would mean that you can use these "advanced" disc's as the old 1x disc. Just burn it with the old standard, one bit, not 3 bits per pixel. This means that if the cd-r and cd-rw manefactures wants to, they could stop producing the old 1x only discs, and only make these 3x's disc's. This gives you a bigger reason to update the firmware in your existing hardware or buy new.
Sometimes you just have to throw away old technology and start all over. You do it in the software industry too. Floppies was made better, it started with 180Kb ?? perhaps even smaller, then it moved to 320, 720, 1200, and 1440. But today people wants MB, not KB, and preferably GB's.
The most promising in this technology might be their idea to make 80 and 60 mm disc' s. Take your average 3.5" (94x90mm) floppy, has a nice size, it can fit in a pocket, a CD cant do that, unless it is a BIG pocket, and then it does feel ackward. A floppy can also fit in a standart envelope, where a CD is again too big.
The 80mm should hold 650 mb, which really is quite enough for "casual" moving of data. You can have small video clips, you can have lots of pics, or perhaps music. They have a 60mm disk, whats that, minidisc size, i think so, nut 100% sure, which holds 200mb.
The best part is that i dont see ANY reason why you cant use one of these disc's in existing CD-R/CR-RW's. And just burn the regular 1 bit instead of the advanced 3 bit. This means that if the manefactures license this, or create their own, then these 3xCD's can possibly very fast be very cheap for the media that is. This gives the advantage that there is no reason NOT to buy the 3x version vs. the 1x. And this gives a further reason for people to upgrade the firmware of their eq, so it can read these discs. I understood a software would be enough, no hardware was needed. In that case, a firmware change, and you can burn these big discs, or the old 1x's if you choose.
i think you have misunderstood what free software is and who makes it. What do you think the letters FSF stands for ?? Free Software Foundation ?? I think so, but i'm sure you can check at www.gnu.org Free software is software that is GPL'ed. RMS specificialy says that Apple understood open software, but not free software. So, you, like many others, missunderstood free/open source. RMS and FSF wants to ensure that if you use some of their work, and create something smart, that they can use your extensions, and thats why they want you to GPL. If you arent happy with that, you can make your own license, used a BSD alike, or make it public domain.
To all of you who are giving knee-jerk "why should genes be patented?" reaction, remember why patents exist in the first place. It's to foster innovation, not to retard it. The point is to allow people to spend a lot of money developing something, without the danger of having it immediately stolen.
Well the current patent system doesnt foster innovation, it actualy makes it harder, because everyone applies for any patent that covers anything, and the sues. And yes, the current patentsystem does retard innovation. Suppose you are company A. You have this idea, that you start working on. Someone else, independent of you, gets the same idea, and also starts develloping it. Though you start "innovating" before company B, they "innovate" faster than you do, for some unknown reason. So, they apply for the patent, yet you got the idea years before they did. Guess who gets the patent ?? What about all those millions you invested in innovating ?? They are lost. Even if you have a better product, and thats why you were longer innovating. And yes, it has happened countless times before, and will again. Take the phone, we think graham bell was the inventer. Well, he wasnt the only inventor, a woman named Elisa Grey (as far as i remember) also invented it, but applied after graham bell, though she might have had the idea first. The current patentsystem just isnt good enough.
Think about it. Why would a drug company spend hundreds of millions of dollars, if not billions, identifying a gene for a disease, developing a cure, and then the day after they ship the drug, it's immediately mass produced by every other drug company? Hey, that'd be a great business -- simply wait for drug companies to develop cures, and then mass produce their labor
Britney Spears makes music. She has no patent on music, yet she keeps on producing more and more music. Noone (legaly) copies her work, and sells identical copies. Or even closely related to that. If they do, the have to pay her money. The same thing could be done to protect a company's investment, they dont need patents for that, but could do with some sort of "copyright"
You have to give companies the ability to recoup their expenses in developing these things, or they are simply not going to spend the money to develop them.
That is not correct. For a long time you couldnt patent software and mathematics in europa, and you still cant. Yet still we have european mathematicans thinking up new mathematics, and we have european software companies producing software, even though they cant patent it. It pays to be the front runner, you have experience before others arrive, and technology isnt moving slower. So, if you invent something, that is smart, and takes years, it will also take other people a long time, perhaps not as long. If it doesnt take them this long, then you arent any good at innovating. I agree that direct copying of your product doesnt seem like the best option for you to invest money in somethings, but when ever you innovate, you risk that someone else thought of this before you, and you just dont know it, or that they will think of it, but innovate faster than you for some reason. Therefore, if you get an idea, you invest money in it, even though there is just a small chance for it to pay off.
I dont think pr0n galleries will be irrelevant.
Lots of pr0n places show you a gallery of thumbnails, and when you click those thumbnails for bigger pictures, they want money...
how rude!
There was standard backup devices that used VHS.
At least I remeber having seen ads for devices that would save computer data onto VHS tapes. You could even use your regular video for it. I think it was just a cable from your computer to the video, and a card to transform the data.
The real problem is that the cpu makers doesnt give away a compiler for their cpu, or work with
free compilers to create good support for their cpu. Why arent these optimisations in gcc ??
If regular users can not get hold of binaries compiled with good compilers, or the good compilers to compile their own stuff, then their real life usage of the cpu will look worse than the one in the review. The reviews shouldnt be done with special equipment, that being hardware or software, or with the aid of engineers that knows one side only. It should be done with standart equipment so we, the normal users would know what to expect.
Intel, AMD, and other cpu makers, that being x86 or not, give away the compilers, and see your hardware shine, or help GCC getting good support for your CPU, which we, the normal users can benefit from.
ion++
ps: there might be other free compilers than GCC
And what if the binary was written in assembler ?? or bytecode for that matter.
I refuse to see any difference between source code and binary files, because a binary can be written in assembler, which is binary code.
The difference is between how hard it is to express yourself in the language.
Should there be different copyright laws just because a book is written in danish and not english ?? Or a program written in python vs. assembler. Python is a interpreted language, like wise is assembler. Assembler is just interpreted by hardware.
So, weather or not something is binary or "source code" i want the same laws to apply for it all.
I think the digital revolution has changed our life. But the internet is only a part of the digital revolution. The digital revolution is not over yet, it will be over when most things are distributed digitaly. The implications of distributing everything digitaly will be that everyone are sharing everything with everybody. Naturaly the law will have to be changed so this wont be illegal, and yes, it will be changed, because we can not have that 99% of the population are doing criminal stuff. The law is supposed to reflect what the general opinion considers okay/right behavior/... I doubt encryption of digital stuff will bypass this effect. In the beginning it might, but thats just until someone creates a program that records everything else a process is doing. So, in order to share a digital copy with your friend, you just "play" the program, and record every instruction this process is doing. It'll be big, but part of the digital revolution is the ever increasing storage capasity.
Hopefully the sharing of digital content will result in total sharing of ideas. Much to the benefit of mankind, and not just for the benefit of man. (no patents what so ever)
Well yes and no, the licenses might be conflicting. And one would expect that people checked the license.
However, the doom source with the original license is prolly not download able from ID software any more. The haxen is prolly something you get from Raven. And lastly the GPL'ed doom source you can prolly download from ID software's homepage. Granted you could prolly get all 3 from different, and perhaps even the same site.
But, you would get 3 different.tgz files, and each of those files are covered by it's own license. Some, perhaps most of the content in the.tgz file, might be the same, but i doubt everything is, though perhaps the doom source with license 1, and license GPL.
I would think that only the owner of this code may repackage it under a new license. I see this as you may NOT take a file from the gpl'ed.tgz and put it into any of the other dir's where you unpacked those.tgz files. Even if the content is the same, because the files are covered by different licenses.
So, i create a new functionality, and send out the patch under one of those 3 licenses, or under all of them if i choose to do so, or under public domain, or... However, years ago, just after the 1. source code release, someone created a patch, and neither i, you, or anyone else may put this patch into the gpl'ed doom source.tgz (the creater of the patch may rerelease it, but then you would have to download the patch from his/hers site, even if the files where identical.)
Of course it might be annoying that the code is under 3 licenses, or 2, or 5, or... The solution would be to look in those patches and reimplement them under the GPL, (not sure if this is legal, but i think so) And the developpers should then just use the GPL in the future.
And for any new projects of course.
ion++ GPL, because anything else is insuperior (though perhaps PLAN9's new license might be better, just might)
if you want more security... and is really paranoid like me;-0 then why not this senario
ADSL -> hub -> server also in the hub is a network cable, that has the SEND lines cut over, so the machine only can receive. On this machine you constantly "record" anything on the network, much like the tivo. Then you run real time checks on the netpackets, and the most strange you log to your hd. If it is big enough, and the site is small enough you could have a day, a week, perhaps a month's data on the disk of suspisious connections.
As for the syslog... why not send them over the serial line into the previously described computer, and on this computer dump everything into a text file so no command could ever be executed, simply anything from com1 is saved as/var/log/log_from_server
and then you run your logcheck program on the log.
ion++ ps: i remember someone video recording the console which was writting everything to the console.
just how many years to come do you think people will be using modems ?? I think that broadband services will grow faster and faster, because the more broadband owners there are, the more services, like movies on demand will there be, and that will create more people wanting broadband. Also, people not living in houses, but dorms, appartments in cities... will team up and buy a big internet line together. ion++
Slashdot Mirror
The other day when i upgraded work's few windows machines, i found out that there are 2 patches, with the same name, of different size. One works for IE5.01 sp1, the other for IE5.5 sp1. And ONLY the english version.
So, not only do you need the patch, you also need to upgrade to a newer, and switch to an english version.
Further more, if you already run IE5.5 in a non-english version, you're fucked. And if you dont have 62MB free on drive C: you are fucked too.
Dear microsoft, it's great you make it so EASY to be a sysadmin, and apply patches. NOT!
ion++
You seem to describe linux NOT using ipfilter, but making their own, iptables, as a bad idea.
... is a bad idea. Multiple choices enhances life and survival (imagien living from just one sort of food, and it becomming extingt).
:(
It might not neassesarely be a bad idea.
I will write a few analogies, but basicaly my response is
Competition is good
If you buy into that, you dont have to read on, if not, please do.
Why even have Linux in the first place, we have BSD. But wait, there is 3 BSD's, (there was 4), BSDi/FreeBSD, OpenBSD and netBSD??
But BSD is just a further devellopment of earlier *nix systems (i'm not too knowledgeable of the unix history). But Unix was built on Multics, so lets keep that, or better yet, some system before that.
Why do we have xx different OS's ??
One should be enough!
Why do we have xx different webservers ??
One should be enough!
Why do we have xx different GUI's ??
One should be enough!
Why do we have xx (2) different chipmakers ??
One should be enough!
Why do we have xx harddrive makers ??
Why do we have xx monitor makers ??
[high pitched voice getting estatic]
kabinets? keyboards? cola? beer? car?
clothes? tvchannels?
[voice cramming over]
political views ??
[breating normal]
Because, competition is good
It's good having choice, not everyone likes the same, or chooses the same over something else.
Naturaly we can work together, and we should, but that doesnt mean one implementation, one manefacturer,
So, be thankfull for being able to choose, and not having the goverment, or some company choose for you. While the first is becomming less and less apparent in the world, the second is becoming more and more widespread.
And the worst part is that people doesnt seem to care
ion++
Hollywood tought everybody that (american) cars explode on impact.
Just dont hit anything and your blackhole powered car will be fine.
The article mentioned using this in camera's with 80mm discs (a little smaller than a floppy), or 60mm in portable music players. In these sizes the disc could hold 650 and 200MB, which is quite nice for that sort of stuff. So what does it matter if the price is 10 og 20$ for a disc. Compared to the 85-90$ for a 64MB compactflash and 50$ for a 32MB. (pricewatch.com) Eventualy the price for these discs might even hit the 1$ a regular cdr is these days, i doubt compact flash will be that low.
your 1-4 points: if these discs can store 3 bits, and are intented to be used with regular cd-rom laser technology, clearly the same discs can be burnt using just 1 of those 3 bits. Remember, 3 bits means 8 different levels of light. If you can have 8, you can also have 2 levels of light, so you should be able to use these advances disc in your old cdr, though only burning the regular 650MB. This would mean that the CDR disc manefactures might only ship these discs. So, every CDR you buy has the ability to store 650MB, or with the right drive, 3x 650MB = 1950MB or almost 2GB. If the media supports it, and is as cheap, or almost as cheap as the old cdr's, which would you buy ?? just in case.
The articly further mentions just a software update. If thats all it takes you just need new firmware, possibly only new cdr creation software. This is where the real advantage comes in. Naturaly a firmware update doesnt let cd-rom drive manefactures sell new units, but should they choose to do so, you should possibly be able to use a firmware update. Some companies are already creating new firmware for the drives, so why not add this feature, if it isnt so hard. It makes the manefacture able to destingius itself from the others and say to you "we give you support and features for many years, not abandoning you the minute you walk out the door." So, if they do this, you get a nicer picture of them, and a higher reason to buy their eq next time.
ion++
So ??
How many discs are you burning that you dont expect to hold a very long time ??
lets see what data are usualy put on discs
The article talked about putting this into camera's and mp3 players / "walkmens" / "discmen" / "minidiscman" /
Sure a long lifetime would be nice, but some people, i know i do, usualy just listens to the lastest music the radio plays. So a short lifetime doesnt matter if the disc is cheap.
So, what does a marketing dude see from this... Cool 2 markets, one for casual data where the lifetime doesnt matter that much, and one for importent data where the lifetime is importent. So, you sell the 1-3 years cheap, knowing you'll sell lots of these. The others have longer lifetime. And since they offer an extra value, you can sell these for more money. Though they might be more expensive to make, they shouldnt be that much more expensive. Imagien having cd's which could hold data until my kids gets old... i bet people wouldnt mind paying 10$ for a disc that lasts this long or perhaps even 20$. Remember you dont have to use the long term discs. I doubt it would matter much if they only hold the usualy 650MB for the long term discs. (at least for the next decade or so)
Read my other replies, i think i happened to write it twice, about why these discs can also hold 1bit instead of 3bit.
ion++
The article seems to give the impression that only a firmware change is enough to make existing cd drives and burners the ability to burn these new discs. However, firmware updates doesnt give people any reason to buy new eq.
However, one of the real advantages of this should be that if you can store 3 bits at each "pixel" surely you can also store 1 bit. This would mean that you can use these "advanced" disc's as the old 1x disc. Just burn it with the old standard, one bit, not 3 bits per pixel. This means that if the cd-r and cd-rw manefactures wants to, they could stop producing the old 1x only discs, and only make these 3x's disc's. This gives you a bigger reason to update the firmware in your existing hardware or buy new.
ion++
Sometimes you just have to throw away old technology and start all over. You do it in the software industry too.
Floppies was made better, it started with 180Kb ?? perhaps even smaller, then it moved to 320, 720, 1200, and 1440.
But today people wants MB, not KB, and preferably GB's.
The most promising in this technology might be their idea to make 80 and 60 mm disc'
s. Take your average 3.5" (94x90mm) floppy, has a nice size, it can fit in a pocket, a CD cant do that, unless it is a BIG pocket, and then it does feel ackward. A floppy can also fit in a standart envelope, where a CD is again too big.
The 80mm should hold 650 mb, which really is quite enough for "casual" moving of data. You can have small video clips, you can have lots of pics, or perhaps music. They have a 60mm disk, whats that, minidisc size, i think so, nut 100% sure, which holds 200mb.
The best part is that i dont see ANY reason why you cant use one of these disc's in existing CD-R/CR-RW's. And just burn the regular 1 bit instead of the advanced 3 bit. This means that if the manefactures license this, or create their own, then these 3xCD's can possibly very fast be very cheap for the media that is. This gives the advantage that there is no reason NOT to buy the 3x version vs. the 1x. And this gives a further reason for people to upgrade the firmware of their eq, so it can read these discs. I understood a software would be enough, no hardware was needed. In that case, a firmware change, and you can burn these big discs, or the old 1x's if you choose.
ion++
i think you have misunderstood what free software is and who makes it. What do you think the letters FSF stands for ??
Free Software Foundation ??
I think so, but i'm sure you can check at www.gnu.org
Free software is software that is GPL'ed.
RMS specificialy says that Apple understood open software, but not free software. So, you, like many others, missunderstood free/open source.
RMS and FSF wants to ensure that if you use some of their work, and create something smart, that they can use your extensions, and thats why they want you to GPL.
If you arent happy with that, you can make your own license, used a BSD alike, or make it public domain.
ion++
Well the current patent system doesnt foster innovation, it actualy makes it harder, because everyone applies for any patent that covers anything, and the sues. And yes, the current patentsystem does retard innovation.
Suppose you are company A. You have this idea, that you start working on. Someone else, independent of you, gets the same idea, and also starts develloping it. Though you start "innovating" before company B, they "innovate" faster than you do, for some unknown reason. So, they apply for the patent, yet you got the idea years before they did. Guess who gets the patent ?? What about all those millions you invested in innovating ?? They are lost. Even if you have a better product, and thats why you were longer innovating.
And yes, it has happened countless times before, and will again. Take the phone, we think graham bell was the inventer. Well, he wasnt the only inventor, a woman named Elisa Grey (as far as i remember) also invented it, but applied after graham bell, though she might have had the idea first. The current patentsystem just isnt good enough.
Britney Spears makes music. She has no patent on music, yet she keeps on producing more and more music. Noone (legaly) copies her work, and sells identical copies. Or even closely related to that. If they do, the have to pay her money. The same thing could be done to protect a company's investment, they dont need patents for that, but could do with some sort of "copyright"
That is not correct. For a long time you couldnt patent software and mathematics in europa, and you still cant. Yet still we have european mathematicans thinking up new mathematics, and we have european software companies producing software, even though they cant patent it.
It pays to be the front runner, you have experience before others arrive, and technology isnt moving slower. So, if you invent something, that is smart, and takes years, it will also take other people a long time, perhaps not as long. If it doesnt take them this long, then you arent any good at innovating.
I agree that direct copying of your product doesnt seem like the best option for you to invest money in somethings, but when ever you innovate, you risk that someone else thought of this before you, and you just dont know it, or that they will think of it, but innovate faster than you for some reason. Therefore, if you get an idea, you invest money in it, even though there is just a small chance for it to pay off.
ion++
I dont think pr0n galleries will be irrelevant.
Lots of pr0n places show you a gallery of thumbnails, and when you click those thumbnails for bigger pictures, they want money...
how rude!
There was standard backup devices that used VHS.
At least I remeber having seen ads for devices that would save computer data onto VHS tapes. You could even use your regular video for it. I think it was just a cable from your computer to the video, and a card to transform the data.
ion++
moderate the parent up, the AC has a point, it's
a console, no need for an API as ALL the hardware is identical.
The real problem is that the cpu makers doesnt give away a compiler for their cpu, or work with
free compilers to create good support for their cpu. Why arent these optimisations in gcc ??
If regular users can not get hold of binaries compiled with good compilers, or the good compilers to compile their own stuff, then their real life usage of the cpu will look worse than the one in the review. The reviews shouldnt be done with special equipment, that being hardware or software, or with the aid of engineers that knows one side only. It should be done with standart equipment so we, the normal users would know what to expect.
Intel, AMD, and other cpu makers, that being x86 or not, give away the compilers, and see your hardware shine, or help GCC getting good support for your CPU, which we, the normal users can benefit from.
ion++
ps: there might be other free compilers than GCC
And what if the binary was written in assembler ??
or bytecode for that matter.
I refuse to see any difference between source code and binary files, because a binary can be written in assembler, which is binary code.
The difference is between how hard it is to express yourself in the language.
Should there be different copyright laws just because a book is written in danish and not english ?? Or a program written in python vs. assembler.
Python is a interpreted language, like wise is assembler. Assembler is just interpreted by hardware.
So, weather or not something is binary or "source code" i want the same laws to apply for it all.
ion++
I think the digital revolution has changed our life. But the internet is only a part of the digital revolution.
The digital revolution is not over yet, it will be over when most things are distributed digitaly.
The implications of distributing everything digitaly will be that everyone are sharing everything with everybody. Naturaly the law will have to be changed so this wont be illegal, and yes, it will be changed, because we can not have that 99% of the population are doing criminal stuff. The law is supposed to reflect what the general opinion considers okay/right behavior/...
I doubt encryption of digital stuff will bypass this effect. In the beginning it might, but thats just until someone creates a program that records everything else a process is doing.
So, in order to share a digital copy with your friend, you just "play" the program, and record every instruction this process is doing. It'll be big, but part of the digital revolution is the ever increasing storage capasity.
Hopefully the sharing of digital content will result in total sharing of ideas. Much to the benefit of mankind, and not just for the benefit of man. (no patents what so ever)
Well yes and no, the licenses might be conflicting. And one would expect that people checked the license.
.tgz files, and each of those files are covered by it's own license. Some, perhaps most of the content in the .tgz file, might be the same, but i doubt everything is, though perhaps the doom source with license 1, and license GPL.
.tgz and put it into any of the other dir's where you unpacked those .tgz files.
... .tgz (the creater of the patch may rerelease it, but then you would have to download the patch from his/hers site, even if the files where identical.)
...
However, the doom source with the original license
is prolly not download able from ID software any more.
The haxen is prolly something you get from Raven.
And lastly the GPL'ed doom source you can prolly download from ID software's homepage.
Granted you could prolly get all 3 from different, and perhaps even the same site.
But, you would get 3 different
I would think that only the owner of this code may repackage it under a new license. I see this as you may NOT take a file from the gpl'ed
Even if the content is the same, because the files are covered by different licenses.
So, i create a new functionality, and send out the patch under one of those 3 licenses, or under all of them if i choose to do so, or under public domain, or
However, years ago, just after the 1. source code release, someone created a patch, and neither i, you, or anyone else may put this patch into the gpl'ed doom source
Of course it might be annoying that the code is under 3 licenses, or 2, or 5, or
The solution would be to look in those patches and reimplement them under the GPL, (not sure if this is legal, but i think so)
And the developpers should then just use the GPL in the future.
And for any new projects of course.
ion++
GPL, because anything else is insuperior (though perhaps PLAN9's new license might be better, just might)
if you want more security... and is really paranoid like me ;-0
/var/log/log_from_server
then why not this senario
ADSL -> hub -> server
also in the hub is a network cable, that has the SEND lines cut over, so the machine only can receive.
On this machine you constantly "record" anything on the network, much like the tivo.
Then you run real time checks on the netpackets, and the most strange you log to your hd. If it is big enough, and the site is small enough you could have a day, a week, perhaps a month's data on the disk of suspisious connections.
As for the syslog... why not send them over the serial line into the previously described computer, and on this computer dump everything into a text file so no command could ever be executed, simply anything from com1 is saved as
and then you run your logcheck program on the log.
ion++
ps: i remember someone video recording the console which was writting everything to the console.
PS: When I read the article, their counter was at 340. Next refresh displayed all zeroes ... poor website.
/.'ed
It just wrapped arround after being
just how many years to come do you think people will be using modems ?? I think that broadband services will grow faster and faster, because the more broadband owners there are, the more services, like movies on demand will there be, and that will create more people wanting broadband. Also, people not living in houses, but dorms, appartments in cities... will team up and buy a big internet line together. ion++