On the other hand, however, couldn't these DoS attacks be considered illegal, or hacking, or terrorist acts by already too broad US legislation???
Probably not considering the activity they're DoSing is already illegal, it would be like sueing a jewlry store for not letting the men with the ski masks in.
This doesn't bother me one bit, it only affects people pirating copyrighted music so in that respect it's certainly better than trying to shut the network down.
The flaw in this classic argument is that all the things you mention are single purpose devices, they do one thing and one thing only (a car moves you from A to B, same for a plane, a phone makes a voice link with someone else, etc.) A computer on the other hand is a totaly different beast, it serves a multitude of functions. Everything from typing up a term paper to blowing up someone half way around the world in the latest first person shooter. Because of this a "computer" cannot magicaly do all the things it does and stay as user friendly as single purpose tools, it's a general purose machine and thus the user going to have to learn a at least a little about it to get it to do what he'she wants it to.
Yes, SATA will support drives larger than 128GB. I don't recall exactly how big a drive it will support but it's probably 2TB or some other ridiculously large size.
You were right on the money untill you brought up the old CPU utilization argument. With UDMA the CPU utilization of modern IDE controllers on todays GHz processors is trivial.
Their budget is made up primarily of public funds (aka tax dollars). Public money is supposed to be spent on things which benifit the public, therefore publicly funded software should be "free" to all since everyone payed for it. I say "free" because like I said, you actualy paided for it with your taxes.
That has more to do with the fact that the systems have been out of production for many years now making it hard to even find one for sale. And the games are produced in very limited quantities, especialy US versions.
I was under the impression copyright law stated that it is legal to make copies of copyrighted material for personal use. I would think copying software from the disk to RAM qualifies as personal use.
I first went online when I was 12 years old and I very quickly learned to steer clear of sites explicitly for kids. They were almost always nothing but some (usually poorly designed) graphics, some animated gifs, and a few sentences of actual content per page. Maybe I was just weird, but I wanted to get strait at the content, not look at dumb animated gifs.
Say what you will about cable having greater bandwidth, I'm happy with my DSL because I get a solid 160K/s 100% of the time. I realy don't like the idea of my bandwidth fluxuating beyond my control.
Maybe on the low-end, but on the high-end it's more like $2000. And that's the major reason I've stayed away from LCDs, to get one good enough that I would even start to consider replacing any of my Viewsonic CRTs with it would be prohibativly expensive.
That wouldn't realy work, with most games each person has thier own viewpoint that must be rendered separatly meaning that the best you could do would be to keep the speed the same. Incidently this is what multiplayer PC games have done for years and what the X-Box does when you play multi over a LAN.
The bit about distributed computing an the PS3 has been going around for a while now. It is almost certainly either flat out false or not what everyone thinks it is. What it most certainly does not mean is they're going to distribute the load over a WAN (namely the internet) to other people's PS3s. Games are one of the most realtime critical apps out there, you could never get the latency over the internet down to a point where you could send some calulation to another machine and get it back in time to be useful. What it more likely means is the PS3 will use a processor with some new method of processing things in parallel and "distributing" the load to keep the pipes full.
Actauly it is quite likely they were in fact DVD quality. Screeners (promotional copies sent to people like movie critics) are now often distributed on DVD, and these inevitably end up in pirates' hands.
Yes there are several telcos in the US, but usualy only one services a given area, meaning they effectivly have all the power of a monopoly. That "there's no competition" crap is not crap at all, it's a very real issue.
Re:too late, unless its way cheap
on
Serial ATA Coming
·
· Score: 2, Informative
USB2 and FW are no where near fast enough to be a next gen HD interface, nor where they designed as such. SATA is many times faster than FW/USB2 (500 MB/s vs 50 MB/s for FW) and supports key features for HDs (daisy chaining etc). USB2 and FW are nice general purpose external interfaces which also do an ok job with HDs, but they were never meant to repace IDE and never will.
Ironicaly enough, Gnutella's search model does suck. If we've leaned anything about P2P it's that bandwidth is golden, yet gnutella wastes ungodly amounts of bandwidth routing searches. The fact that the amount of bandwidth used at every servlet for searches is directly proportional to the total servlets on the network means gnutella scales teribly.
Fasttrack has the right idea for searches, idealy you have some servlets which are dedicated to chaching share lists and routing searches. Once you get a small(er) number of servlets handling searches, each of which handles a few hundered of the sharing servlet's share lists, and routing them between each other you get much more efficient use of bandwidth since each time the search is passed over the net it gets searched against several hundered users' share lists instead of just one.
It's not just a simple matter for Intel to increase the Itanium's x86 performance. The reason it runs so slow is because it uses an emulation layer for x86 which is always going to be dog slow, the only way intel could fix it would be to do a major (as in almost complete) redesign. Hammer on the other hand can exicute x86 in hardware since it's 64-bit instruction set is a superset of x86. Itanium will likely never see the desktop, instead Intel will fork off another chip line for the consumer/workstation market (like the Pentium/Xeon lines today).
They added noise to all the other encodings. Don't believe me? I re-encoded their 8 kbps kts stream to 8.5 kbps rm and even after the recompression it sounds better, listen.
While I admit I have no clue what the article is talking about (hyper what?), I was under the impression we could already do better than linear scalability with a simple hierarchical P2P network. Just have a dynamic cluster of loosely connected "servers" to which clients maintain a persistent connection to only one. With a little intelligent routing of queries between servers (i.e. don't just spit the querey out to all the other servers you know) you get O(1) scalability at the client side and something (probably significantly) better than O(n) on the server side.
Slashdot Mirror
On the other hand, however, couldn't these DoS attacks be considered illegal, or hacking, or terrorist acts by already too broad US legislation???
Probably not considering the activity they're DoSing is already illegal, it would be like sueing a jewlry store for not letting the men with the ski masks in.
This doesn't bother me one bit, it only affects people pirating copyrighted music so in that respect it's certainly better than trying to shut the network down.
The flaw in this classic argument is that all the things you mention are single purpose devices, they do one thing and one thing only (a car moves you from A to B, same for a plane, a phone makes a voice link with someone else, etc.) A computer on the other hand is a totaly different beast, it serves a multitude of functions. Everything from typing up a term paper to blowing up someone half way around the world in the latest first person shooter. Because of this a "computer" cannot magicaly do all the things it does and stay as user friendly as single purpose tools, it's a general purose machine and thus the user going to have to learn a at least a little about it to get it to do what he'she wants it to.
Yes, SATA will support drives larger than 128GB. I don't recall exactly how big a drive it will support but it's probably 2TB or some other ridiculously large size.
You were right on the money untill you brought up the old CPU utilization argument. With UDMA the CPU utilization of modern IDE controllers on todays GHz processors is trivial.
they'll think they were suckered into buying some kind of like a cheap knock-off
And rightly so, I'd say that's exactly what Lindows is.
Their budget is made up primarily of public funds (aka tax dollars). Public money is supposed to be spent on things which benifit the public, therefore publicly funded software should be "free" to all since everyone payed for it. I say "free" because like I said, you actualy paided for it with your taxes.
That has more to do with the fact that the systems have been out of production for many years now making it hard to even find one for sale. And the games are produced in very limited quantities, especialy US versions.
I was under the impression copyright law stated that it is legal to make copies of copyrighted material for personal use. I would think copying software from the disk to RAM qualifies as personal use.
I first went online when I was 12 years old and I very quickly learned to steer clear of sites explicitly for kids. They were almost always nothing but some (usually poorly designed) graphics, some animated gifs, and a few sentences of actual content per page. Maybe I was just weird, but I wanted to get strait at the content, not look at dumb animated gifs.
Say what you will about cable having greater bandwidth, I'm happy with my DSL because I get a solid 160K/s 100% of the time. I realy don't like the idea of my bandwidth fluxuating beyond my control.
about $200.
Maybe on the low-end, but on the high-end it's more like $2000. And that's the major reason I've stayed away from LCDs, to get one good enough that I would even start to consider replacing any of my Viewsonic CRTs with it would be prohibativly expensive.
That would negate the purpose for the whole thing, all the parts where speed matters are the parts that are hard to port.
I don't know if I could ever trust a company with the word "Wang" in it's name.
How about: "Daikatana won't suck. We swear!"
That wouldn't realy work, with most games each person has thier own viewpoint that must be rendered separatly meaning that the best you could do would be to keep the speed the same. Incidently this is what multiplayer PC games have done for years and what the X-Box does when you play multi over a LAN.
The bit about distributed computing an the PS3 has been going around for a while now. It is almost certainly either flat out false or not what everyone thinks it is. What it most certainly does not mean is they're going to distribute the load over a WAN (namely the internet) to other people's PS3s. Games are one of the most realtime critical apps out there, you could never get the latency over the internet down to a point where you could send some calulation to another machine and get it back in time to be useful. What it more likely means is the PS3 will use a processor with some new method of processing things in parallel and "distributing" the load to keep the pipes full.
Actauly it is quite likely they were in fact DVD quality. Screeners (promotional copies sent to people like movie critics) are now often distributed on DVD, and these inevitably end up in pirates' hands.
Regional monopoly.
Yes there are several telcos in the US, but usualy only one services a given area, meaning they effectivly have all the power of a monopoly. That "there's no competition" crap is not crap at all, it's a very real issue.
USB2 and FW are no where near fast enough to be a next gen HD interface, nor where they designed as such. SATA is many times faster than FW/USB2 (500 MB/s vs 50 MB/s for FW) and supports key features for HDs (daisy chaining etc). USB2 and FW are nice general purpose external interfaces which also do an ok job with HDs, but they were never meant to repace IDE and never will.
Ironicaly enough, Gnutella's search model does suck. If we've leaned anything about P2P it's that bandwidth is golden, yet gnutella wastes ungodly amounts of bandwidth routing searches. The fact that the amount of bandwidth used at every servlet for searches is directly proportional to the total servlets on the network means gnutella scales teribly.
Fasttrack has the right idea for searches, idealy you have some servlets which are dedicated to chaching share lists and routing searches. Once you get a small(er) number of servlets handling searches, each of which handles a few hundered of the sharing servlet's share lists, and routing them between each other you get much more efficient use of bandwidth since each time the search is passed over the net it gets searched against several hundered users' share lists instead of just one.
It's not just a simple matter for Intel to increase the Itanium's x86 performance. The reason it runs so slow is because it uses an emulation layer for x86 which is always going to be dog slow, the only way intel could fix it would be to do a major (as in almost complete) redesign. Hammer on the other hand can exicute x86 in hardware since it's 64-bit instruction set is a superset of x86. Itanium will likely never see the desktop, instead Intel will fork off another chip line for the consumer/workstation market (like the Pentium/Xeon lines today).
They added noise to all the other encodings. Don't believe me? I re-encoded their 8 kbps kts stream to 8.5 kbps rm and even after the recompression it sounds better, listen.
Though I would like to see what would happen if someone made a server for Q3A that didn't check CD keys.
Nothing of course, the id master server stopped checking CD keys a while ago.
While I admit I have no clue what the article is talking about (hyper what?), I was under the impression we could already do better than linear scalability with a simple hierarchical P2P network. Just have a dynamic cluster of loosely connected "servers" to which clients maintain a persistent connection to only one. With a little intelligent routing of queries between servers (i.e. don't just spit the querey out to all the other servers you know) you get O(1) scalability at the client side and something (probably significantly) better than O(n) on the server side.