But what about products that actually are better than their predecessors?
Many of the products you mention may do the job as well as they did when new, but their replacements do the job *better* -- either directly (like cleaner clothes) or have a lower impact (use less power/fuel/water, are quieter, less polluting), or offer more features (delayed start, surround sound, more inputs/outputs).
Your snowblower is likely 2-cycle -- loads of pollution (noise & particulate). Your cars are far more dangerous in accident, pollute, get terrible fuel economy and require far more maintenance, not to mention being less enjoyable to drive (vinyl bench seats, AM radios).
Your washing machines undoubtedly are too loud and use too much electricity and water and don't wash as good as their modern counterparts.
Your stereo, while perhaps providing a good output signal, doesn't have enough inputs or outputs for conemporary usage and probably uses more electricity. Your speakers probably have paper cones and can't last forever.
I agree that too much of what is made is crap designed to be thrown out far earlier than it could be designed for. But carefully replacing some stuff every 10 or so years isn't a bad idea, simply to get the improvements in quality and environmental impact.
The question I have is, is there any recovery done on the parts that fall away? Do they just sink into the ocean, or are they even worth recovering -- damage from falling, child stage engine blast, etc?
Any concern for people/ships/planes that might be flying underneath where the parts fall away or is some attempt made to ensure that the places where the stages drop is 'empty'?
Don't think of range increases personally
on
New Look at ADSL2
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
Instead think of them in a larger scope.
Many Telcos are starting to roll out evironmentally hardened DSLAMs that they can pole or slab mount to serve areas that have demand but are too far from an existing DSLAM.
If a Telco can now reach a larger subscriber base without rolling out as many remote DSLAMs, that results in an increase in available infrastructure dollars, which could translate into fast or a greater number of remote DSLAM rollouts. I can also increase DSLAM rollouts by increasing revenue per DSLAM, since a given DSLAM can now service more customers, which might in turn make more DSLAM rollouts more affordable for Telcos.
It's the obligatory DJB software thread
on
SDSC Secure Syslog
·
· Score: 2
Does anyone else find it somewhat amusing that nearly every story about a core unix process, be it an improvement or a security notice, features a thread promoting some DJB utility?
Even more amusing is the obligatory disclaimer about how annoying DJB and his licenses are, the absence of development on some of the packages (djbdns comes to mind), or some other quirk that makes them difficult to replace what's already there.
The "silly guide data" is the fuel for the program selection engine that makes Tivo different from other systems.
I record just what I want when I want it, without having to work very hard at it. I want all Scorsese movies -- it gets 'em, without me having to do A THING. The same goes for any other keyword, actor, show type, etc. Doing the same thing with any other recording device would entail hours of scavaging printed TV guides (which are often grossly inaccurate or don't contain information for a lot of cable channels), in addition to countless hours spent reprogramming the limited number of recording slots available on most recording devices, manual conflict management and so on.
I do appreciate the complaint about the cost -- I don't understand the economics of Tivo, but the service pricing is a little high. However, provided my unit lasts a little over two years (I have little reason to believe it won't), the service cost to me will fall below $10 per month which is pretty trivial for the value it provides.
I've also come to realize just how much worthwhile entertainment is actually on TV. This is normally a lost value to most cable subscribers, even to those with VCRs, because it's time-consuming to sift through the possibilities and a lot of the programming is on when you can't watch it.
With Tivo, I get a lot more out of what I'm already paying for, and since I do I'm a lot less inclined to spend money on other entertainment (rentals, PPV, movies). I only need to not go to 2 movies or or not rent 4 new releases in a month to pay for the Tivo subscription.
I just got Tivo, and while I'm not a huge fan of the fee (I went box lifetime subscription), you have to remember that with the fee you get software updates and fixes and a really good, highly detailed program guide.
Tivos feature set goes well beyond just recording Sopranos on Sunday nights at 8PM.
I'm not saying an HDD-based VCR wouldn't be a good thing, I wouldn't mind having one, but don't compare it to Tivo -- it's not the same.
This means there's a lot of potential to teach them about Linux, *BSD, and open-source.
I read this statement and saw a similar version right next to it: "There's a lot of potential to teach them about economics, history and socialism."
Two of those things are disciplines, one's a specific political theory. Two of your topics are operating systems, one's an often controversial intellectual property concept. What are you trying to teach them -- about Linux or a BSD, or to proselytize about Open Source?
Sure, how Linux or BSDs are developed ("Who makes Linux Mr. Smith?") is likely to be addressed, but a simple explanation that it has many developers collaborating and is distributed freely would be an adequate explanation. Especially considering you're dealing with kids -- even adults with a good grasp of what intellectual property is don't always grasp the concept of open source well.
I wish you well, but don't lose focus as to what you're doing. If you want to preach open source, fine, but don't call it an operating system class, call it an appeal for open source.
Hell no, but I'm not sure I wanted her, either. She was "hot" in all the conventional ways, but there was something kind of tired and worn out about her at the same time, like she had been in the life a little too long -- just a hair too much booze, coke, cigs and high living.
If I was 50+, it would have been a good bet. I was like 30 at the time, so it just seemed a little scary.
What's sad is that the FTC's idea of legitimate business (and many MBAs' idea of legitimate business) is what most ordinary people consider deceptive and/or fraudulent behavior.
If employees acted the same way lots of businesses and advertisers behaved, they'd get fired. If spouses acted that way, they'd be divorced. If friends acted that way, they'd become enemies.
Why is it acceptable to conduct commerce in a manner that would, in any other relationship sphere, be considered dishonest behavior? It's this "If I can get away with it" morality that really turns me off, and its pervasive in politics and business.
I think modular housing would be really cool, especially if I could move the walls and windows.
I thought you might be able to come close in a loft-type space with "walls" that were similar to cubicle walls, but mounted on hidden casters. The walls would be of a couple of varying widths (1/3, 2/3, full width), heights (1/2, full) and a doorway module (1/3 to 2/3 width, accomodate varying door styles -- normal, double, swinging, etc). There's a whole laundry list of specialty modules -- closets, etc.
Power would be a problem as your floorplans would have to accomodate whatever your physical space's power plan was, but would be eased by having the walls pre-wired for power and daisy chainable, as well as having maybe a good grid of floor jacks.
Plumbing and gas are the big obstacles, since any real modularity would require you to move as needed the kitchen and bathrooms. The kitchen is half easy -- go with electric appliances and come up with some modular cabinets that can be removed/inserted into some caster-mounted work surfaces following the 1/3, 2/3, full width wall rules. Water supply and sewage/drainage are the real challenges, with the only "solution" to movability being supply water coming from overhead. Sewer and drain water *might* be something you could pump out overhead as well.
You could go "down" if you wanted, but in a loft space you generally can't dig into the floor. A false floor would solve this (3ft raised ala data centers).
With a big enough space you could really do some interesting floor plans and traffic flows. There's little reason a house couldn't be done the same way, and having control of the entire building might even solve some of the plumbing challenges by allowing you to go "down" more easily, by putting preset sewage and water lines in the floor for the modules that need them.
It's not "real" architecture, but it would be really cool space planning. "Re-arrange the furniture? I'm gonna re-arrange the *house*!" Having just spent 40 some hours re-arranging my home office, though, I wonder how often I'd really feel like moving around the entire contents of my house. Maybe if everything was on casters and one level...
thing that japanese bike fans complain about in HD's is exactly what HD fans want most of the time, believe it or not.
Sounds like Windows/Linux -- the thing that Windows users complain about linux (CLI, endless configuration) are exactly the things linux users want....
I met a model on an airplane once and she started telling me that she won't date guys that ride motorcycles. I told her that I had one and I asked her why not.
"Is it one of those Harleys?" she asked.
No, I replied, its a '91 Kawasaki.
"Well, maybe than I wouldn't have a problem. Most guys with Harleys spend so much on their motorcycles there's nothing left. The guys that have money left rely on their motorcycle to prop up their image, if you know what I mean."
So you'll look cool, but a lot of people think you're either broke or impotent...
Harleys, until they began to be redesigned in the 1980s, were parts-compatible with Harleys built in the 1950s. You could take a part off of a brand-new Harley in 1975 and put it on a Harley built in the 50s and it would fit (as well as any Harley part has ever fit...). You can imagine the story that this tells, both from a design engineering perspective (you mean we should *update* our designs?) and from a manufacturing perspective (new tooling? But the designs are the same!).
In addition to antique designs and manufacturing, they also were getting their butts kicked by the Japanese who were producing throw-away priced bikes that needed near very low maintenance and had sports-car like performance, primarily due to their superior designs and suprerior manufacturing.
They've rebounded a lot, thanks to improved manufacturing and also due to improved engineering and designs. Emissions restrictions will eventually push them to liquid cooling for tighter tolerances.
Personally I can't help but think that it's still mostly marketing. Even the performance Harley, the Buell, is an embrassment in performance relative to the Japanense and Italian bikes. My 13 year old Kawi Concours will run circles around all but the newest and highest performance Buells, and is an *order of magnitude* more comfortable over long hauls than any H-D bike.
Sounds like a pre-emptive strike by ranchers to get better livestock price guarantees if/when their herds are ever ordered destroyed. An Elk farmer in Minnesota had his entire herd destroyed and his compensation was the market value of the animals, which sounds fine, until you find out that the Elk market has gone through some gyrations in the past few years, and Elk prices are way down.
Many ranchers are "stuck" holding a lot of Elk herds that are worth a lot less than when they were bought, meaning that you need to hold them, breed them and sell a lot more Elk to make back your initial investment. If you sue the government now, you might be able to get a negotiated agreement to refund more than the current market price for Elk if they have to wipe out your herd.
On one hand, I feel for the guy who put his whole nut into the "Elk Ranch" concept and is being essentially wiped off the financial map. On the other hand, I can't help think its special-interests-via-the-courts welfare.
I say split X into two flavours, the 'normal' desktop type of GUI subsystem, and the 'networked' stuff that most people aren't going to use (mom & pop kettle and heck even me). Cut out a bunch of the extra teeth pulling you have to go through to get X running and middle layers of stuff, and save that for the folks that want to harness the power (i.e. X terminals all over the place).
I'd go even further -- the "desktop environment" (framebuffer, window manager, desktop, network layer) should be integrated into a single package with zero dependencies. It would give you 90% of what even most "power" users refuse to give up X for *and* give a level of integration and simplified configuration that most people crave.
I think the networked aspect of X is important -- look at what MS has been doing with Terminal Services -- but not at the cost of X's legacy baggage and excessive complexity.
I've been using Linux since '96 and I've only had two "OK" experiences with X, the rest were fraught with frustration and disappointment. Even when it worked about as it was supposed to have, I stopped using it because of the underwhelming value it brought to the table.
Linux will be ready for the desktop when Gnome or KDE drop dead (I can't wait) and some consistency settles in. Until then, I'll run BSD on my servers (the documentation is much better as a result of the consistency) and Windows on the desktop.
Actually my theory is that Linux on the Desktop will be "there" when KDE (or Gnome, but I expect KDE would do it first) drops X in favor of a simpler, less complicated and less legacy-encumbered layer which is easier to configure.
Modularity is cool, but when the dependency list for anti-aliased fonts in a browser is 10 seperate projects long, 3 of which don't get along well because they don't like each other's licenses, then people say that $129 for Windows makes sense.
We do some of this, although the logic and rationale most of the time for being able to do "any vlan to any port" has proven in my small environment (500 users, 6 floors, 6 VLANs) to be of somewhat limited value.
I've trunked the DMZ to a port in our studio, kept closet switches on the core VLAN, and put a port in my office on the core network, but beyond that devices generally "belong" to the network they're on, and being able to dynamically move a given machine between ports and have it auto-home to the subnet it "belongs" to sounds like a lot of work and investment in time/software/record-keeping.
We had a huge flat, shared-media (not switched) network when I started, now its 100% 100MB switched with a Layer 3 switch at the core. I still get the willies when I think of the legwork alone required for fault isolation.
Any technology paper that starts talking about "business models" scares me. I can't help but think that "business model" is just a scheme to use intellectual property, lawyers and standards bodies to put a cash siphon between the "real" producer of something of value and the consumer.
Yes, I know its a b-school buzzword for explaining how specific industries or businesses operate, but even that informs me that there's not common sense, old-fashioned, buy low-sell high capitalism behind this idea, but instead there's a fast-buck, get-in-get-rich mentality behind it..
Let's see, its software that runs a substantial portion of their business, so important that they find it desirable to have and modify the source code. Given the range of providers, if the original poster was just the low-ball bidder and all other providers providers the same products in the same manner (ie, working access to the source code), then maybe you're right -- demanding a bond on the source code might be too much.
But if you got the contract because no one else *would* share the source code, suddenly its a different ballgame and having them get bonded to access the source code suddenly is more reasonable. Given that it was "Ask Slashdot?", I'd guess the contract isn't worth more than $300k per year, and a bond of that size to any decent sized company would likely not require them to hand over the pink slip to the factory, it might actually be reasonable.
Instead of relying on the courts, make them take out a bond payable to you upon a pre-determined proof of contract violation.
It's a hell of a lot more bulletproof than the courts, and oftentimes bond issuers will make them put up some hard assets as collateral (property, buildings, tools, or a big cash percentage) which is no big deal if they're honest, but fucks them right in the ass if they're not.
The bond issuer will be legally required to pay the bond based upon the contract surrounding the bond's payment terms, but they don't care that much since they've got the pink slip to the factory. Sure, they'd rather not liquidate the factory, but that's the business they're in and they're good at it.
Jury trials are a huge hassle, and even if you're right you don't always win, and even if you win you lose due to costs, delays and lame jury awards (contract to Republican fear mongering, they're not always generous).
I listen to a lot of really far right news and talk on the radio in the car, I don't find it terribly interesting television though. I used to get a laugh out of O'Reilly, but lately he seems to be kind of a self-parody..
When I made that example, I caught myself typing "I don't care if Paul Westerberg is *ON* the 700 Club, I never want it recorded..." and immediately realized that if Paul Westerberg were to actually appear on the 700 Club, not only would I want Tivo to tape it, I'd likely rush out and buy a DVD recorder and make a dozen copies.
In combining two things at the outer extremes of my preference, I forgot that the thing I liked and the inherent irony of it appearing on the 700 club would truly rank above my dislike of the 700 club.
However, I'd hope that I could preference rank my likes/disklikes -- "Paul Westerberg" would be above "700 Club", but 700 Club would be RIGHT below...
Is it possible on a Tivo to list some things as categories of shows you NEVER want it to record, regardless of what the thumbs up/down algorithms say?
I'm up for it recording a program I don't normally watch (like say Letterman) if it includes a performer or guest I'm interested in (like say, Paul Westerberg).
But I never want it to record the 700 Club, regardless of how many thumbs up I give to Scorsese's "Last Temptation of Christ" or how many "Holy Land" documentaries I watch on History Channel.
Is it a question of just providing global geographic and network diversity for a site's nameservice, or is there something here that I'm missing?
If I was example.com and I had an office in two locations with a T1 in each, NY and LA and I had three NS records, ns-la.exmaple.com, ns-ny.example.com and ns.myisp.com what are they going to offer me that I don't already have?
Proprietary firewall technology? OC-192s to 10 providers? Some home-brewed nameserver software more immune to hack attacks? Some kind of latency measure that replies with better A records?
They're all nice, but they're all expensive, although maybe I'm missing out on something I should have.
Slashdot Mirror
But what about products that actually are better than their predecessors?
Many of the products you mention may do the job as well as they did when new, but their replacements do the job *better* -- either directly (like cleaner clothes) or have a lower impact (use less power/fuel/water, are quieter, less polluting), or offer more features (delayed start, surround sound, more inputs/outputs).
Your snowblower is likely 2-cycle -- loads of pollution (noise & particulate). Your cars are far more dangerous in accident, pollute, get terrible fuel economy and require far more maintenance, not to mention being less enjoyable to drive (vinyl bench seats, AM radios).
Your washing machines undoubtedly are too loud and use too much electricity and water and don't wash as good as their modern counterparts.
Your stereo, while perhaps providing a good output signal, doesn't have enough inputs or outputs for conemporary usage and probably uses more electricity. Your speakers probably have paper cones and can't last forever.
I agree that too much of what is made is crap designed to be thrown out far earlier than it could be designed for. But carefully replacing some stuff every 10 or so years isn't a bad idea, simply to get the improvements in quality and environmental impact.
The question I have is, is there any recovery done on the parts that fall away? Do they just sink into the ocean, or are they even worth recovering -- damage from falling, child stage engine blast, etc?
Any concern for people/ships/planes that might be flying underneath where the parts fall away or is some attempt made to ensure that the places where the stages drop is 'empty'?
Instead think of them in a larger scope.
Many Telcos are starting to roll out evironmentally hardened DSLAMs that they can pole or slab mount to serve areas that have demand but are too far from an existing DSLAM.
If a Telco can now reach a larger subscriber base without rolling out as many remote DSLAMs, that results in an increase in available infrastructure dollars, which could translate into fast or a greater number of remote DSLAM rollouts. I can also increase DSLAM rollouts by increasing revenue per DSLAM, since a given DSLAM can now service more customers, which might in turn make more DSLAM rollouts more affordable for Telcos.
Does anyone else find it somewhat amusing that nearly every story about a core unix process, be it an improvement or a security notice, features a thread promoting some DJB utility?
Even more amusing is the obligatory disclaimer about how annoying DJB and his licenses are, the absence of development on some of the packages (djbdns comes to mind), or some other quirk that makes them difficult to replace what's already there.
The "silly guide data" is the fuel for the program selection engine that makes Tivo different from other systems.
I record just what I want when I want it, without having to work very hard at it. I want all Scorsese movies -- it gets 'em, without me having to do A THING. The same goes for any other keyword, actor, show type, etc. Doing the same thing with any other recording device would entail hours of scavaging printed TV guides (which are often grossly inaccurate or don't contain information for a lot of cable channels), in addition to countless hours spent reprogramming the limited number of recording slots available on most recording devices, manual conflict management and so on.
I do appreciate the complaint about the cost -- I don't understand the economics of Tivo, but the service pricing is a little high. However, provided my unit lasts a little over two years (I have little reason to believe it won't), the service cost to me will fall below $10 per month which is pretty trivial for the value it provides.
I've also come to realize just how much worthwhile entertainment is actually on TV. This is normally a lost value to most cable subscribers, even to those with VCRs, because it's time-consuming to sift through the possibilities and a lot of the programming is on when you can't watch it.
With Tivo, I get a lot more out of what I'm already paying for, and since I do I'm a lot less inclined to spend money on other entertainment (rentals, PPV, movies). I only need to not go to 2 movies or or not rent 4 new releases in a month to pay for the Tivo subscription.
I just got Tivo, and while I'm not a huge fan of the fee (I went box lifetime subscription), you have to remember that with the fee you get software updates and fixes and a really good, highly detailed program guide.
Tivos feature set goes well beyond just recording Sopranos on Sunday nights at 8PM.
I'm not saying an HDD-based VCR wouldn't be a good thing, I wouldn't mind having one, but don't compare it to Tivo -- it's not the same.
This means there's a lot of potential to teach them about Linux, *BSD, and open-source.
I read this statement and saw a similar version right next to it: "There's a lot of potential to teach them about economics, history and socialism."
Two of those things are disciplines, one's a specific political theory. Two of your topics are operating systems, one's an often controversial intellectual property concept. What are you trying to teach them -- about Linux or a BSD, or to proselytize about Open Source?
Sure, how Linux or BSDs are developed ("Who makes Linux Mr. Smith?") is likely to be addressed, but a simple explanation that it has many developers collaborating and is distributed freely would be an adequate explanation. Especially considering you're dealing with kids -- even adults with a good grasp of what intellectual property is don't always grasp the concept of open source well.
I wish you well, but don't lose focus as to what you're doing. If you want to preach open source, fine, but don't call it an operating system class, call it an appeal for open source.
which is why rabbit is a commonly eaten animal in a lot of the Christian world. I know its at my grocery store.
(It's kind of lean and best moist cooked. I smoked it wrapped in bacon, which wasn't bad.)
Hell no, but I'm not sure I wanted her, either. She was "hot" in all the conventional ways, but there was something kind of tired and worn out about her at the same time, like she had been in the life a little too long -- just a hair too much booze, coke, cigs and high living.
If I was 50+, it would have been a good bet. I was like 30 at the time, so it just seemed a little scary.
What's sad is that the FTC's idea of legitimate business (and many MBAs' idea of legitimate business) is what most ordinary people consider deceptive and/or fraudulent behavior.
If employees acted the same way lots of businesses and advertisers behaved, they'd get fired. If spouses acted that way, they'd be divorced. If friends acted that way, they'd become enemies.
Why is it acceptable to conduct commerce in a manner that would, in any other relationship sphere, be considered dishonest behavior? It's this "If I can get away with it" morality that really turns me off, and its pervasive in politics and business.
I think modular housing would be really cool, especially if I could move the walls and windows.
I thought you might be able to come close in a loft-type space with "walls" that were similar to cubicle walls, but mounted on hidden casters. The walls would be of a couple of varying widths (1/3, 2/3, full width), heights (1/2, full) and a doorway module (1/3 to 2/3 width, accomodate varying door styles -- normal, double, swinging, etc). There's a whole laundry list of specialty modules -- closets, etc.
Power would be a problem as your floorplans would have to accomodate whatever your physical space's power plan was, but would be eased by having the walls pre-wired for power and daisy chainable, as well as having maybe a good grid of floor jacks.
Plumbing and gas are the big obstacles, since any real modularity would require you to move as needed the kitchen and bathrooms. The kitchen is half easy -- go with electric appliances and come up with some modular cabinets that can be removed/inserted into some caster-mounted work surfaces following the 1/3, 2/3, full width wall rules. Water supply and sewage/drainage are the real challenges, with the only "solution" to movability being supply water coming from overhead. Sewer and drain water *might* be something you could pump out overhead as well.
You could go "down" if you wanted, but in a loft space you generally can't dig into the floor. A false floor would solve this (3ft raised ala data centers).
With a big enough space you could really do some interesting floor plans and traffic flows. There's little reason a house couldn't be done the same way, and having control of the entire building might even solve some of the plumbing challenges by allowing you to go "down" more easily, by putting preset sewage and water lines in the floor for the modules that need them.
It's not "real" architecture, but it would be really cool space planning. "Re-arrange the furniture? I'm gonna re-arrange the *house*!" Having just spent 40 some hours re-arranging my home office, though, I wonder how often I'd really feel like moving around the entire contents of my house. Maybe if everything was on casters and one level...
thing that japanese bike fans complain about in HD's is exactly what HD fans want most of the time, believe it or not.
Sounds like Windows/Linux -- the thing that Windows users complain about linux (CLI, endless configuration) are exactly the things linux users want....
I met a model on an airplane once and she started telling me that she won't date guys that ride motorcycles. I told her that I had one and I asked her why not.
"Is it one of those Harleys?" she asked.
No, I replied, its a '91 Kawasaki.
"Well, maybe than I wouldn't have a problem. Most guys with Harleys spend so much on their motorcycles there's nothing left. The guys that have money left rely on their motorcycle to prop up their image, if you know what I mean."
So you'll look cool, but a lot of people think you're either broke or impotent...
AMF's mismanagement wasn't the only problem.
Harleys, until they began to be redesigned in the 1980s, were parts-compatible with Harleys built in the 1950s. You could take a part off of a brand-new Harley in 1975 and put it on a Harley built in the 50s and it would fit (as well as any Harley part has ever fit...). You can imagine the story that this tells, both from a design engineering perspective (you mean we should *update* our designs?) and from a manufacturing perspective (new tooling? But the designs are the same!).
In addition to antique designs and manufacturing, they also were getting their butts kicked by the Japanese who were producing throw-away priced bikes that needed near very low maintenance and had sports-car like performance, primarily due to their superior designs and suprerior manufacturing.
They've rebounded a lot, thanks to improved manufacturing and also due to improved engineering and designs. Emissions restrictions will eventually push them to liquid cooling for tighter tolerances.
Personally I can't help but think that it's still mostly marketing. Even the performance Harley, the Buell, is an embrassment in performance relative to the Japanense and Italian bikes. My 13 year old Kawi Concours will run circles around all but the newest and highest performance Buells, and is an *order of magnitude* more comfortable over long hauls than any H-D bike.
Sounds like a pre-emptive strike by ranchers to get better livestock price guarantees if/when their herds are ever ordered destroyed. An Elk farmer in Minnesota had his entire herd destroyed and his compensation was the market value of the animals, which sounds fine, until you find out that the Elk market has gone through some gyrations in the past few years, and Elk prices are way down.
Many ranchers are "stuck" holding a lot of Elk herds that are worth a lot less than when they were bought, meaning that you need to hold them, breed them and sell a lot more Elk to make back your initial investment. If you sue the government now, you might be able to get a negotiated agreement to refund more than the current market price for Elk if they have to wipe out your herd.
On one hand, I feel for the guy who put his whole nut into the "Elk Ranch" concept and is being essentially wiped off the financial map. On the other hand, I can't help think its special-interests-via-the-courts welfare.
I say split X into two flavours, the 'normal' desktop type of GUI subsystem, and the 'networked' stuff that most people aren't going to use (mom & pop kettle and heck even me). Cut out a bunch of the extra teeth pulling you have to go through to get X running and middle layers of stuff, and save that for the folks that want to harness the power (i.e. X terminals all over the place).
I'd go even further -- the "desktop environment" (framebuffer, window manager, desktop, network layer) should be integrated into a single package with zero dependencies. It would give you 90% of what even most "power" users refuse to give up X for *and* give a level of integration and simplified configuration that most people crave.
I think the networked aspect of X is important -- look at what MS has been doing with Terminal Services -- but not at the cost of X's legacy baggage and excessive complexity.
I've been using Linux since '96 and I've only had two "OK" experiences with X, the rest were fraught with frustration and disappointment. Even when it worked about as it was supposed to have, I stopped using it because of the underwhelming value it brought to the table.
Linux will be ready for the desktop when Gnome or KDE drop dead (I can't wait) and some consistency settles in. Until then, I'll run BSD on my servers (the documentation is much better as a result of the consistency) and Windows on the desktop.
Actually my theory is that Linux on the Desktop will be "there" when KDE (or Gnome, but I expect KDE would do it first) drops X in favor of a simpler, less complicated and less legacy-encumbered layer which is easier to configure.
Modularity is cool, but when the dependency list for anti-aliased fonts in a browser is 10 seperate projects long, 3 of which don't get along well because they don't like each other's licenses, then people say that $129 for Windows makes sense.
We do some of this, although the logic and rationale most of the time for being able to do "any vlan to any port" has proven in my small environment (500 users, 6 floors, 6 VLANs) to be of somewhat limited value.
I've trunked the DMZ to a port in our studio, kept closet switches on the core VLAN, and put a port in my office on the core network, but beyond that devices generally "belong" to the network they're on, and being able to dynamically move a given machine between ports and have it auto-home to the subnet it "belongs" to sounds like a lot of work and investment in time/software/record-keeping.
We had a huge flat, shared-media (not switched) network when I started, now its 100% 100MB switched with a Layer 3 switch at the core. I still get the willies when I think of the legwork alone required for fault isolation.
Any technology paper that starts talking about "business models" scares me. I can't help but think that "business model" is just a scheme to use intellectual property, lawyers and standards bodies to put a cash siphon between the "real" producer of something of value and the consumer.
Yes, I know its a b-school buzzword for explaining how specific industries or businesses operate, but even that informs me that there's not common sense, old-fashioned, buy low-sell high capitalism behind this idea, but instead there's a fast-buck, get-in-get-rich mentality behind it..
Let's see, its software that runs a substantial portion of their business, so important that they find it desirable to have and modify the source code. Given the range of providers, if the original poster was just the low-ball bidder and all other providers providers the same products in the same manner (ie, working access to the source code), then maybe you're right -- demanding a bond on the source code might be too much.
But if you got the contract because no one else *would* share the source code, suddenly its a different ballgame and having them get bonded to access the source code suddenly is more reasonable. Given that it was "Ask Slashdot?", I'd guess the contract isn't worth more than $300k per year, and a bond of that size to any decent sized company would likely not require them to hand over the pink slip to the factory, it might actually be reasonable.
Instead of relying on the courts, make them take out a bond payable to you upon a pre-determined proof of contract violation.
It's a hell of a lot more bulletproof than the courts, and oftentimes bond issuers will make them put up some hard assets as collateral (property, buildings, tools, or a big cash percentage) which is no big deal if they're honest, but fucks them right in the ass if they're not.
The bond issuer will be legally required to pay the bond based upon the contract surrounding the bond's payment terms, but they don't care that much since they've got the pink slip to the factory. Sure, they'd rather not liquidate the factory, but that's the business they're in and they're good at it.
Jury trials are a huge hassle, and even if you're right you don't always win, and even if you win you lose due to costs, delays and lame jury awards (contract to Republican fear mongering, they're not always generous).
I listen to a lot of really far right news and talk on the radio in the car, I don't find it terribly interesting television though. I used to get a laugh out of O'Reilly, but lately he seems to be kind of a self-parody..
When I made that example, I caught myself typing "I don't care if Paul Westerberg is *ON* the 700 Club, I never want it recorded..." and immediately realized that if Paul Westerberg were to actually appear on the 700 Club, not only would I want Tivo to tape it, I'd likely rush out and buy a DVD recorder and make a dozen copies.
In combining two things at the outer extremes of my preference, I forgot that the thing I liked and the inherent irony of it appearing on the 700 club would truly rank above my dislike of the 700 club.
However, I'd hope that I could preference rank my likes/disklikes -- "Paul Westerberg" would be above "700 Club", but 700 Club would be RIGHT below...
Is it possible on a Tivo to list some things as categories of shows you NEVER want it to record, regardless of what the thumbs up/down algorithms say?
I'm up for it recording a program I don't normally watch (like say Letterman) if it includes a performer or guest I'm interested in (like say, Paul Westerberg).
But I never want it to record the 700 Club, regardless of how many thumbs up I give to Scorsese's "Last Temptation of Christ" or how many "Holy Land" documentaries I watch on History Channel.
I never quite got the whole outsourced DNS thing.
Is it a question of just providing global geographic and network diversity for a site's nameservice, or is there something here that I'm missing?
If I was example.com and I had an office in two locations with a T1 in each, NY and LA and I had three NS records, ns-la.exmaple.com, ns-ny.example.com and ns.myisp.com what are they going to offer me that I don't already have?
Proprietary firewall technology? OC-192s to 10 providers? Some home-brewed nameserver software more immune to hack attacks? Some kind of latency measure that replies with better A records?
They're all nice, but they're all expensive, although maybe I'm missing out on something I should have.