But I *don't* want others to respect my licenses. In fact, I want them to act freely, as they see fit, in accordance with the dictates of their conscience, and to leave me in peace.
When I release software, I don't apply any license. I just release it. Then it is free. And when I write software for someone else, who buys exclusive rights, I charge more.
's not an ethical question. 's a farfetched *hypothetical* question. Boss could do the same thing today without drugs, or with meth.
Re:Proxim doubled 802.11a last year...
on
802.11b at 22mbps
·
· Score: 2
This might be more interesting as a point-to-point link, however, with a pair of tight yagi unidirectional antennae, running over open air, you can (one may suppose) get a VERY fat pipe over a few *miles*, which would otherwise cost beaucoup de argent, for OC-12 or dark fiber.
Look, Ma! I made an HDTV MAN for $300!
Re:Would someone please explain...
on
802.11b at 22mbps
·
· Score: 2
You will *never* get a secure wireless connection unless you encrypt the traffic using open-source software on dedicated hardware, end of story. WEP is perfectly well suited to prevent accidental eavesdropping, which is all that any vendor-supplied encrypting driver software (or hardware!) can ever seriously claim to offer. If you believe otherwise, you just bought a tanker load of snake oil, my friend. Closed software/hardware has been proven by hard experience to be so frequently corrupted by intentionally inserted weaknesses, that relying on it for security against snoops and hacks (as opposed to mere casual scanning) is misguided at best.
> And they do transmit through walls... although > not concrete or metal or mirrors
don't forget old back-plaster-on-wire-mesh wallwork from ca. 1910. I think I need an *house* upgrade. Even with a carefully chosen and oriented omni on my AP, I barely get 10 meters of range at 1Mbps!
> or some ceramics.
Pardon my naivete, but.... for the love of God, Montressor! -- who makes walls out of ceramics?!?!
It's not something I'd invest in for causual, enthusiast, or home use, but if you have a business or operational requirement that can be met by the product *now*, you should at least evaluate whether it's worth spending a few bucks on short-term throwaway hardware (plus the admin tax).
Re:I'll Still Trade Security for Bandwidth
on
802.11b at 22mbps
·
· Score: 2
As long as you're relying on vendor drivers, you're getting snake oil, not security. MS stuff has secretly escrowed keys, for example. The only way to get security over any link is to use an open-source vpn, whether as an encrypted tunnel, or as an application proxy.
Hehe. Yeah. That's how I got into speed reading. Back then I would read all the USENET news. All of it. Sitting at home with an Atari 1040ST, scrolling all the text that 2400bps could push.
The R/W drives should run about $200 according to the WSJ article on this subject (http://ptech.wsj.com/ptech.html). Sure, it's a non-starter as a medium for mass-market publishing -- but who cares about that?! DataPlay offers tiny portable drives that store 500MB on a disk the size of a quarter! That rocks. Disregard their access control crap. Everyone will ignore that, and use them exclusively as file-systems.
It's foolish to listen to both sides of a story, when one of the sides is a fabric of lies. You only risk being deceived.
For that matter, where is the proof that for every story, there are N sides where N=2? It may be true if every story is 2-dimensional, but a simple topological proof will demonstrate that no story can be less that 3-dimensional (reference previous story on textarc.org).
But then, I'm just arguing for the sake of arguing. I think there's something about slashdot that creates this disputatious compulsion.
Yes. That's the point. It is market-driven censorship. The fact that it is done automatically just makes it all the more economically pure: It is the decision of a purely rational agent, which is otherwise a fiction of the mind of the economist.
Really, it is very, very stupid to mix multiple languages in an application. I mean, 2 years later, when the VBA guy has alzheimers, and the C%#!)%^& guy has gone home to Delhi, and the Haskell guy has started a competing business, how are you going to maintain this app?
Yeah, Myth #8 is a pipe-dream, and a failure in the execution is pre-ordained by a failure at the theory level, but even if it were not a delusional fever-dream, it would just be a bad idea all around.
Re:Has the Military heard of video compression?
on
Space Wars
·
· Score: 2
sure you do, you just do it losslessly. but the biggest gain comes from taking hires only in areas of interest. think of a geoserv running on an LEO.
the end of the pax americana
on
Space Wars
·
· Score: 1, Flamebait
The dead in Ramallah and Jenin, in Koh-i-tot and My Lai, Panama and Grenada, might argue that it was never very 'pax', but be that as it may, it seems evident that the 'pax americana' is nearing it's end. The increasing importance of guerilla attacks on soft targets, and the rapidly advancing technology of the opponents of the imperium is obsoleting the presumed advantages of our military technology.
The reason for this is that the U.S. is unwilling (for good reason) to restrict the benefits of technology to the military system. Every meaninful advance is reflected in commerical, off-the-shelf technology, if only after some small interval. Indeed, COTS tech often leads dark military tech.
Now this is actually a good thing for american hegemony, because it is COTS technology that drives the economy, and it is the taxation of the economony that enables military purchasing and R&D. More than anything else the capacity and remarkable willingness of the americans to spend such a huge proportion of their product on increasing their military might has buttressed american dominance.
Why then do I doubt the ongoing capability of the americans to rule the world. I already mentioned soft targets. WTC is an excellent example. Another major factor is stealth tech. If Sam Cohen (credited as an inventor of the neutron bomb) is correct, there are now chemical explosives available on the grey market, produced using high-pressure chemical techniques (think diamond anvils) which detonate with sufficient force to eventuate a fusion reaction, in the absence of fissile material. The Soviets have misplaced 24 small tactical nukes. There is enough enriched U235 and Pu missing from the U.S. to remove the state of Texas from the map.
Another major factor is that the U.S. has grossly abused its hegemonic power by supporting regimes around the world which have committed galvanizing attrocities. As a result, there is not only the means (stealth tech) and the opportunity (soft targets) but also the *motive* to attack the root of those attrocities.
In short, all of the elements for a murder (means, opportunity, and motive) are in place. I expect the death of the imperium to follow quite rapidly.
I can hardly wait until the X-box dies so that I can pick them up by the crateful for pennies on the dollar. Oh the projects I can do! Real-time video encoding, home automation, voice recognition, the possibilities are endless.
Re:Cool, but.... They never said if was free!
on
Google to Offer API
·
· Score: 2
Actually, I'm a disgruntled ex-employee. I think of Scott as more like Jim Barksdale on acid than God.
In most real-world apps, semantics aren't much of an issue, because the peers, their interfaces and collaborations, are domain-constrained. You really can automatically understand interfaces because your peer set consists only of agents which share a limited universe of discourse.
We're not really talking semantics here. It's more, to continue using the metaphors of natural language linguistics, an issue of pragmatics. in the middle-ground between purely formal syntactic manipulation and symbol-grounding-chinese-room-paradoxical-scott-st rachey-playland semantics. We play in blocks worlds. Bridging the impedance mismatch between different blocks worlds is not so hard as all that.
"fanboys". Your arguments work better without such glaring ad hominems. Syntactic descriptions are plenty for most purposes. In fact, unless you solve symbol-grounding, they're the only game in town, so your complaint is rather like complaining that XML only works with finite-state automata. Until you show me where I can buy a Turing 10000, I think FSAs will have to suffice.
Slashdot Mirror
Just post host routes for every IP that is detected.
> My idea of the perfect standard library isn't one
> that has specialized functions for everything
> under the sun - that is just bloat.
Silly goose. It's not bloat if you don't link it.
It's more tools. Having the right tool for the
job is *always* good.
But I *don't* want others to respect my licenses.
In fact, I want them to act freely, as they see
fit, in accordance with the dictates of their
conscience, and to leave me in peace.
When I release software, I don't apply any
license. I just release it. Then it is free.
And when I write software for someone else,
who buys exclusive rights, I charge more.
the pay scales on the site are a joke.
no wonder then that the feds are such a
bumbling batch of baby-burners!
that sci am fired their best am sci columnist
for not being sufficiently dogmatically darwinist.
's not an ethical question. 's a farfetched
*hypothetical* question. Boss could do the same
thing today without drugs, or with meth.
This might be more interesting as a point-to-point
link, however, with a pair of tight yagi unidirectional
antennae, running over open air, you can (one may
suppose) get a VERY fat pipe over a few *miles*,
which would otherwise cost beaucoup de argent, for
OC-12 or dark fiber.
Look, Ma! I made an HDTV MAN for $300!
You will *never* get a secure wireless connection
unless you encrypt the traffic using open-source
software on dedicated hardware, end of story.
WEP is perfectly well suited to prevent accidental
eavesdropping, which is all that any vendor-supplied
encrypting driver software (or hardware!) can ever
seriously claim to offer. If you believe otherwise,
you just bought a tanker load of snake oil, my
friend. Closed software/hardware has been proven
by hard experience to be so frequently corrupted
by intentionally inserted weaknesses, that relying
on it for security against snoops and hacks (as
opposed to mere casual scanning) is misguided
at best.
> And they do transmit through walls... although
> not concrete or metal or mirrors
don't forget old back-plaster-on-wire-mesh
wallwork from ca. 1910. I think I need an *house*
upgrade. Even with a carefully chosen and oriented
omni on my AP, I barely get 10 meters of range at
1Mbps!
> or some ceramics.
Pardon my naivete, but.... for the love of God,
Montressor! -- who makes walls out of ceramics?!?!
Umm -- because 802.11g doesn't exist?
It's not something I'd invest in for causual,
enthusiast, or home use, but if you have a business
or operational requirement that can be met by the
product *now*, you should at least evaluate whether
it's worth spending a few bucks on short-term
throwaway hardware (plus the admin tax).
As long as you're relying on vendor drivers,
you're getting snake oil, not
security. MS stuff has secretly escrowed keys,
for example. The only way to get security over
any link is to use an open-source vpn, whether
as an encrypted tunnel, or as an application proxy.
Hehe. Yeah. That's how I got into speed reading.
Back then I would read all the USENET news. All of
it. Sitting at home with an Atari 1040ST, scrolling
all the text that 2400bps could push.
The R/W drives should run about $200 according to
the WSJ article on this subject
(http://ptech.wsj.com/ptech.html).
Sure, it's a non-starter as a medium for
mass-market publishing -- but who cares about
that?! DataPlay offers tiny portable drives
that store 500MB on a disk the size of a
quarter! That rocks. Disregard their access control
crap. Everyone will ignore that, and use them
exclusively as file-systems.
I don't think it raises any interesting ethical
questions at all. Could you suggest one?
wow! your arithmetic is almost as appalling as my
grammar.
It's foolish to listen to both sides of a story,
when one of the sides is a fabric of lies. You
only risk being deceived.
For that matter, where is the proof that for every
story, there are N sides where N=2? It may be true
if every story is 2-dimensional, but a simple
topological proof will demonstrate that no story
can be less that 3-dimensional (reference previous
story on textarc.org).
But then, I'm just arguing for the sake of
arguing. I think there's something about slashdot
that creates this disputatious compulsion.
Racial inferiority.
Yes. That's the point. It is market-driven
censorship. The fact that it is done automatically
just makes it all the more economically pure:
It is the decision of a purely rational agent,
which is otherwise a fiction of the mind of the
economist.
Really, it is very, very stupid to mix multiple
languages in an application. I mean, 2 years
later, when the VBA guy has alzheimers, and the
C%#!)%^& guy has gone home to Delhi, and the
Haskell guy has started a competing business, how
are you going to maintain this app?
Yeah, Myth #8 is a pipe-dream, and a failure in
the execution is pre-ordained by a failure at the
theory level, but even if it were not a delusional
fever-dream, it would just be a bad idea all
around.
sure you do, you just do it losslessly.
but the biggest gain comes from taking hires
only in areas of interest. think of a geoserv
running on an LEO.
The dead in Ramallah and Jenin, in Koh-i-tot and
My Lai, Panama and Grenada, might argue that it was
never very 'pax', but be that as it may, it seems
evident that the 'pax americana' is nearing it's
end. The increasing importance of guerilla attacks
on soft targets, and the rapidly advancing
technology of the opponents of the imperium is
obsoleting the presumed advantages of our military
technology.
The reason for this is that the U.S. is unwilling
(for good reason) to restrict the benefits of
technology to the military system. Every
meaninful advance is reflected in commerical,
off-the-shelf technology, if only after some
small interval. Indeed, COTS tech often leads
dark military tech.
Now this is actually a good
thing for american hegemony, because it is COTS
technology that drives the economy, and it is the
taxation of the economony that enables military
purchasing and R&D. More than anything else
the capacity and remarkable willingness of the
americans to spend such a huge proportion of their
product on increasing their military might
has buttressed american dominance.
Why then do I doubt the ongoing capability of the
americans to rule the world. I already mentioned
soft targets. WTC is an excellent example.
Another major factor is stealth tech. If Sam
Cohen (credited as an inventor of the neutron
bomb) is correct, there are now chemical
explosives available on the grey market, produced
using high-pressure chemical techniques (think
diamond anvils) which detonate with sufficient
force to eventuate a fusion reaction, in the
absence of fissile material. The Soviets have
misplaced 24 small tactical nukes. There is
enough enriched U235 and Pu missing from the U.S.
to remove the state of Texas from the map.
Another major factor is that the U.S. has grossly
abused its hegemonic power by supporting regimes
around the world which have committed galvanizing
attrocities. As a result, there is not only the
means (stealth tech) and the opportunity (soft
targets) but also the *motive* to attack the root
of those attrocities.
In short, all of the elements for a murder
(means, opportunity, and motive) are in place.
I expect the death of the imperium to follow
quite rapidly.
Since girl-girl is so sweet, you should feel
honored to have been considered worthy of a
daliance in the first place.
I can hardly wait until the X-box dies so that I
can pick them up by the crateful for pennies on
the dollar. Oh the projects I can do! Real-time
video encoding, home automation, voice recognition,
the possibilities are endless.
Actually, I'm a disgruntled ex-employee.
I think of Scott as more like Jim Barksdale
on acid than God.
In most real-world apps, semantics aren't much
t rachey-playland
of an issue, because the peers, their interfaces
and collaborations, are domain-constrained. You
really can automatically understand interfaces
because your peer set consists only of agents which
share a limited universe of discourse.
We're not really talking semantics here. It's
more, to continue using the metaphors of natural
language linguistics, an issue of pragmatics.
in the middle-ground between purely formal
syntactic manipulation and symbol-grounding-chinese-room-paradoxical-scott-s
semantics.
We play in blocks worlds. Bridging the impedance
mismatch between different blocks worlds is not
so hard as all that.
"fanboys". Your arguments work better without
such glaring ad hominems. Syntactic descriptions
are plenty for most purposes. In fact, unless
you solve symbol-grounding, they're the only
game in town, so your complaint is rather like
complaining that XML only works with finite-state
automata. Until you show me where I can buy
a Turing 10000, I think FSAs will have to suffice.