if they're running all windows why is one of my old coworkers still working for them managing their solaris systems as they try and convert them to windows?
As long as phones and wireless devices are frowned upon on airplanes a combo device will not work well for the frequent traveller.
it doesn't matter if it includes a "turn radio off" feature. flight attendants can't be expected to understand that or be able to actually verify/believe it.
Sparc 5s were our DNS servers for a site with 500 machines and a 100mbit/sec internet connection. A Sparc 10 was our mail server for the same location (a previous job).
what do you mean a mini-itx system doesn't have enough cpu power to handle dns and mail. get real. stop running exchange.
as if this even matters. sure its polite to tell a company about a bug before posting the exploit but how many companies pay attention to bug reports of security vulnerabilities without the added incentive of public proof that its broken.
If you bought a stroller for your child and somebody else discovered that it had a serious design flaw that could cause it to collapse suddenly when going over bumps seriously injuring the child inside would you (a) prefer that the manufacturer was told silently so that they could take their time to release a fixed version or (b) know as soon as possible that your stroller has serious flaws even if it could not immediately be fixed so that you have the option to stop using it?
It's the same question: its all about companies preventing embarrassment at the (potentially serious) cost of consumers.
he's well aware of a tarball of an entire site. so the images are 5-40k on most sites. you have 20 images. so what. that's no more than 1mb. that's still way too small to torrent.
the latency issue still applies. since bittorrent gets content from all parts of the file at once rather than in-order you wouldn't be able to view any content until the entire thing has loaded.
its best to write a wrapper around bittorrent for hosting.tar.bz2 files in that case and opening the browser to the local filesystem extraction thereof after the entire thing has downloaded.
it doesn't belong within bittorrent itself.
mojonation had / mnet has the ability to publish website content with direct access. it works but that's because it makes a reasonable attempt to do in-order-ish on demand retreival of the data so that it can extract it and feed it to the browser as soon as it has enough to do so. bittorrent is an entirely different beast meant for exactly what bram intended it for: large content.
what? you mean a P2P app that primarily communicates data between the peers in the network should not be called peer to peer?
it sounds like you want a term for fully decentralized peer to peer. that is merely a subset of the possibilities.
(another way to think of any p2p data distribution app is as poor-sods multicast since multicast routing on the internet at large is not available to 99.999% of those connected)
easy: host the.torrent on your website and count its hits.
semi-easy: run your own tracker for your content.
the bittorrent tracker knows how many people attempted to download the content and how many people actually finished getting the whole thing (they become seed nodes).
complaining that bittorrent messes up your hit counts is like complaining that someone taking your content and hosting it on another server to ease your load messes up your hit counts.
bittorrent would work reasonably for large security updates that all need to be downloaded at a similar time (soon after release).
regardless, redhat is in the business of selling their up2date service; given that and given that many paying users are behind corporate firewalls, is it really worth it for them?
they have no desire to make it work better for non paying users do they?
Many home NAT gateways come with an Evil feature called UPnP that ms is pushing for the future. basically they let any "application" inside behind the NAT detect the gateway and easily ask it to open one or more ports thru to the host in question using some extreemly bloated soap-ish xml-ish queries to the NAT box.
"application" is in quotes because microsoft makes it super easy to send people an auto-executing "application" to their Outlook mail client.;)
bittorrent doesn't support UPnP but things of that nature can be supported. It is intended to make P2P networking behind nat much more plausable.
one of the lessons learned working on mojonation in its original days was that "search is hard" so its best to leave that up to the people that know how to do that very very well.
threatening Bram because of bittorrent would be about like threatening Microsoft for writing and distributing IIS and windows file sharing or threating the apache developers for writing a web server.
Anybody who creates a torrent file can use any tracker they choose. I better not get sued because people are using my tracker to distribute Matrix 2.
ah, trackers are completely open (or at least many out there are)? in that case, sorry for the modded up half confusion above that has no doubt spread because nobody reads anything more than once on this sound-bite culture mindset of a site.
sue the seeds and potentially the websites hosting the torrent file describing the hashes of the parts instead.
Get a clue! bittorrent is not a privacy protecting lawless-idiot hiding p2p client. it is meant for big LEGAL downloads.
In order for bittorrent to work someone has to run a tracker. that is the centralization point. it is the single server on the net making the download possible by coordinating the peers for that download.
Legal entities take note: if you're going to sue someone first, sue the tracker operator(s)! Once that is said and done its EASY to simply ask any tracker for a list of peers serving the content to the world. Those are your next obvious targets.
bittorrent as an application is no different than running a simple web server hosting the content from a legal standpoint. it just saves on hosting bandwidth problems by using the downloading peers as a coordinated distributed cache during times of high load.
they did this for obvious reasons. previously the ".emp" or ".rmp" files were simple XML documents with temporarily active URLs to the tracks hosted by mp3.com. scripts could easily rape & raid a huge amount of emusic (ie: not what they intended). Now the ".emp" is still the same xml thing but encrypted with the decryption key embedded in the download manager.
i disliked the change as well. i had written my own downloader that i would use once or twice a month to get another 10 or so albums. so much for that idea. but their download manager combined with their 'my stash' function works fine for me so its no big deal.
interesting tidbits after a little poking around:
The emusic download manager 2.0 appears to be watermarking the mp3 files that it downloads. To check this for yourself, run tcpdump while the download manager is running and get the URL to the actual mp3 that emusic uses to download a track. Fire up wget on this URL and compare what you downloaded to the one the download manager saved. note the corruption + differences. (my own tests performed using the emusic dlm 2.0 for linux; i haven't compared the same track downloaded by two subscribers to check if it really is a watermark or just a bug. it would be difficult for them to screw up otherwise so its likely a watermark indicating who downloaded the track)
also note that the ancient mpg123 player doesn't like many download manager mangled tracks (mpg321, xmms, and everything else i've tried are happy; mpg123 is presumably buggy about skipping bad frames/data)
You still get unlimited downloads in an unencumbered format of high quality VBR music. quit whining and praise them!
They carry *no* Spears albums at all. That's double plus good in my book!
seriously, these DRMed download services that won't even let you burn to a standard audio CD are a crock. don't expect them to catch on enough to stop CD sales. even if they do, what are the chances that said CDs have anything you want on them?
(apple's service at least lets you make a CD from which you can rerip into mp3 if you have tons of time on your hands).
if receive can be properly defined as "in plain text only" then its very easy to store them all. none of that extra 3megs for being word document crap.;)
yes, this is very true. a bunch of clueless drooling morons are downloading their illegal warez using bittorrent right now not realizing that they're easily being tracked by various copyright holders because using bittorrent is no different that downloading from a website that makes its complete server access logs public so that everybody can see exactly who downloaded what when.
its a legitimate tool similar to an ftp client/server or web browser.. many people somehow seem to think that "p2p" means they can use it for illegal purposes without being caught. they'll soon learn.
Slashdot Mirror
bittorrent is useful for any download that would take you over 30 seconds at your max thruput rate.
.torrent link posted & modded up below to get the kernel at 160k/sec no problem.
n t
i just used the
obviously not many others using it though as my uplink hasn't gone over 25% of full capacity.
http://66.227.104.34/linux-2.4.21.tar.bz2.torre
if they're running all windows why is one of my old coworkers still working for them managing their solaris systems as they try and convert them to windows?
As long as phones and wireless devices are frowned upon on airplanes a combo device will not work well for the frequent traveller.
it doesn't matter if it includes a "turn radio off" feature. flight attendants can't be expected to understand that or be able to actually verify/believe it.
Sparc 5s were our DNS servers for a site with 500 machines and a 100mbit/sec internet connection. A Sparc 10 was our mail server for the same location (a previous job).
what do you mean a mini-itx system doesn't have enough cpu power to handle dns and mail. get real. stop running exchange.
as if this even matters. sure its polite to tell a company about a bug before posting the exploit but how many companies pay attention to bug reports of security vulnerabilities without the added incentive of public proof that its broken.
If you bought a stroller for your child and somebody else discovered that it had a serious design flaw that could cause it to collapse suddenly when going over bumps seriously injuring the child inside would you (a) prefer that the manufacturer was told silently so that they could take their time to release a fixed version or (b) know as soon as possible that your stroller has serious flaws even if it could not immediately be fixed so that you have the option to stop using it?
It's the same question: its all about companies preventing embarrassment at the (potentially serious) cost of consumers.
he's well aware of a tarball of an entire site. so the images are 5-40k on most sites. you have 20 images. so what. that's no more than 1mb. that's still way too small to torrent.
.tar.bz2 files in that case and opening the browser to the local filesystem extraction thereof after the entire thing has downloaded.
the latency issue still applies. since bittorrent gets content from all parts of the file at once rather than in-order you wouldn't be able to view any content until the entire thing has loaded.
its best to write a wrapper around bittorrent for hosting
it doesn't belong within bittorrent itself.
mojonation had / mnet has the ability to publish website content with direct access. it works but that's because it makes a reasonable attempt to do in-order-ish on demand retreival of the data so that it can extract it and feed it to the browser as soon as it has enough to do so. bittorrent is an entirely different beast meant for exactly what bram intended it for: large content.
what? you mean a P2P app that primarily communicates data between the peers in the network should not be called peer to peer?
it sounds like you want a term for fully decentralized peer to peer. that is merely a subset of the possibilities.
(another way to think of any p2p data distribution app is as poor-sods multicast since multicast routing on the internet at large is not available to 99.999% of those connected)
easy: host the .torrent on your website and count its hits.
semi-easy: run your own tracker for your content.
the bittorrent tracker knows how many people attempted to download the content and how many people actually finished getting the whole thing (they become seed nodes).
complaining that bittorrent messes up your hit counts is like complaining that someone taking your content and hosting it on another server to ease your load messes up your hit counts.
bittorrent would work reasonably for large security updates that all need to be downloaded at a similar time (soon after release).
regardless, redhat is in the business of selling their up2date service; given that and given that many paying users are behind corporate firewalls, is it really worth it for them?
they have no desire to make it work better for non paying users do they?
Many home NAT gateways come with an Evil feature called UPnP that ms is pushing for the future. basically they let any "application" inside behind the NAT detect the gateway and easily ask it to open one or more ports thru to the host in question using some extreemly bloated soap-ish xml-ish queries to the NAT box.
;)
"application" is in quotes because microsoft makes it super easy to send people an auto-executing "application" to their Outlook mail client.
bittorrent doesn't support UPnP but things of that nature can be supported. It is intended to make P2P networking behind nat much more plausable.
one of the lessons learned working on mojonation in its original days was that "search is hard" so its best to leave that up to the people that know how to do that very very well.
threatening Bram because of bittorrent would be about like threatening Microsoft for writing and distributing IIS and windows file sharing or threating the apache developers for writing a web server.
Anybody who creates a torrent file can use any tracker they choose. I better not get sued because people are using my tracker to distribute Matrix 2.
ah, trackers are completely open (or at least many out there are)? in that case, sorry for the modded up half confusion above that has no doubt spread because nobody reads anything more than once on this sound-bite culture mindset of a site.
sue the seeds and potentially the websites hosting the torrent file describing the hashes of the parts instead.
for story not worth reading.
Get a clue! bittorrent is not a privacy protecting lawless-idiot hiding p2p client. it is meant for big LEGAL downloads.
In order for bittorrent to work someone has to run a tracker. that is the centralization point. it is the single server on the net making the download possible by coordinating the peers for that download.
Legal entities take note: if you're going to sue someone first, sue the tracker operator(s)! Once that is said and done its EASY to simply ask any tracker for a list of peers serving the content to the world. Those are your next obvious targets.
bittorrent as an application is no different than running a simple web server hosting the content from a legal standpoint. it just saves on hosting bandwidth problems by using the downloading peers as a coordinated distributed cache during times of high load.
i suspect their arrangement with mp3.com for handling all of the distributed music hosting doesn't allow for easy server side download limits.
fyi - mpg321 is a drop in replacement for mpg123 i believe.
they did this for obvious reasons. previously the ".emp" or ".rmp" files were simple XML documents with temporarily active URLs to the tracks hosted by mp3.com. scripts could easily rape & raid a huge amount of emusic (ie: not what they intended). Now the ".emp" is still the same xml thing but encrypted with the decryption key embedded in the download manager.
i disliked the change as well. i had written my own downloader that i would use once or twice a month to get another 10 or so albums. so much for that idea. but their download manager combined with their 'my stash' function works fine for me so its no big deal.
interesting tidbits after a little poking around:
The emusic download manager 2.0 appears to be watermarking the mp3 files that it downloads. To check this for yourself, run tcpdump while the download manager is running and get the URL to the actual mp3 that emusic uses to download a track. Fire up wget on this URL and compare what you downloaded to the one the download manager saved. note the corruption + differences. (my own tests performed using the emusic dlm 2.0 for linux; i haven't compared the same track downloaded by two subscribers to check if it really is a watermark or just a bug. it would be difficult for them to screw up otherwise so its likely a watermark indicating who downloaded the track)
also note that the ancient mpg123 player doesn't like many download manager mangled tracks (mpg321, xmms, and everything else i've tried are happy; mpg123 is presumably buggy about skipping bad frames/data)
You still get unlimited downloads in an unencumbered format of high quality VBR music. quit whining and praise them!
They carry *no* Spears albums at all. That's double plus good in my book!
seriously, these DRMed download services that won't even let you burn to a standard audio CD are a crock. don't expect them to catch on enough to stop CD sales. even if they do, what are the chances that said CDs have anything you want on them?
(apple's service at least lets you make a CD from which you can rerip into mp3 if you have tons of time on your hands).
your history may more be more accurate but i prefer the who framed roger rabbit conspiracy theory version. :)
if receive can be properly defined as "in plain text only" then its very easy to store them all. none of that extra 3megs for being word document crap. ;)
get it straight man.
yes, this is very true. a bunch of clueless drooling morons are downloading their illegal warez using bittorrent right now not realizing that they're easily being tracked by various copyright holders because using bittorrent is no different that downloading from a website that makes its complete server access logs public so that everybody can see exactly who downloaded what when.
its a legitimate tool similar to an ftp client/server or web browser.. many people somehow seem to think that "p2p" means they can use it for illegal purposes without being caught. they'll soon learn.
buy an old laptop for $300 on ebay and replace its ~4gb hdd with a new 20gb hdd. run your favorite bsd or linux distro on it.
they killed the public transport system in Los Angeles in the 30s, 40s and 50s for that exact purpose: force every person to need to own a car.
and watch the stuffy sales clerk walk around like a snob and turn everything off including the lights without speaking to you until you leave.
that's how "Good" B&O equipment is. they're worse than Bose when it comes to selling for 8x markup.