Popsci.com Earthday.org American City Business Journals (Sporting News) BMW, AG John S. and James L. Knight Foundation City of Brisbane, Australia E.W. Scripps & Co. Spectrum Magazine Stanford Law School Coghead Do Something BlogHer
One thing related to the pagefile you can do is disable paging the executive. Prevents the kernel from paging certain things, but is only really helpful with 512+ MB of RAM.
There's a registry key for it. You'll have to google for that, as I don't recall it at the moment.
As a matter of fact, you may not be flying at all. It all depends what you're using it for. The problem with SATA is latency, and there's not much that controller is going to do about it. If you've got a server that is performing latency sensitive tasks, then SATA can cause performance problems.
In my experience, if you've got alot of random I/O, SATA is not a viable solution. That said, even if your I/O is mostly random, if there's not a heavy load on the disk, then you're probably ok. If you've got 200 people hitting a database or email server, you're probably going to have some performance problems. Swap it out with SCSI drives, or a quality disk array, and you'll be doing much better. If you've got a web server, or a database server that is exclusively reading, you can probably get away with SATA. Again, it all depends on how much and how random the disk I/O for your application is.
Fine, so this might not be the answer. But does the Economist present any alternative? No. Kinda like someone who complains about something, yet has no idea how to solve the problem.
They should've saved their resources for an article about something they could've been productive about. Economics, for instance.
Working for an insurance company, I'd have to say the first two items are quite important. However, there is alot of misinformation regarding how HIPAA relates to electronically stored data.
First off, file an extension ASAP. We've done so and been given until October 2003 to comply with the currently completed rules.
An important thing to note is that the HIPAA rules are NOT all completed. Most notably the rules regarding data security as relates to data stored and transmitted electronically. This means that there is currently NO DEADLINE for you to electronically secure your data. Additionally, when these rules are completed, there will be a 2 year period during which to become compliant, extensions not withtanding.
Most of the current rules deal with procedural issues and security of information held on paper. Computers can ease some of these issues, but they can also get in the way of timely compliance.
The bottom line? Deal with the regulations that you are faced with, not the ones that aren't there yet.
Collection of Books/links
on
Learning IPv6?
·
· Score: 2, Informative
I've been messing around with IPv6 for a couple years, and reading about it for a couple more, which still puts me behind the curve a bit. Bottom line is this is really new stuff, and the kind of basic information out there is just that, basic, in the same way assembler is basic (though not as basic as straight machine code). There is very little in the way of easy to follow directions, let alone complete network stacks and applications to make use of them. If you want a (mostly) complete IPv6 stack, go with BSD.
http://www.hs247.com/ Has a bunch of links to a ton of information, and is OS agnostic.
One book I've found to be pretty helpful is called IPng and the TCP/IP protocols: Implementing the Next Generation Internet. The first half of the book rambles a bit, but the second half gets down to business quite nicely. It can be a bit technical at points, which I like, but may be a dry for some.
O'Reilly has a good article on 6to4 tunneling at http://www.onlamp.com/pub/a/onlamp/2001/06/01/ipv6 _tutorial.html. The specifics are BSD oriented, but the concepts apply everywhere.
If you want to start writing some code that uses IPv6, the ever popular UNIX Network Programming is a great resource.
What about allowing the transferral of costs caused by defects in software at the user level, instead of at the producer level? Insurance does this quite well. The costs of insuring your company (or yourself) against defects would be based on what software you are using. The cost of insuring a given piece of software would be a function of claims paid because a particular piece of software was found at fault. Perhaps, companies could even be allowed protection from software they produce and use internally. There are a number of complexities that I can see arising, but here I'm just presenting this as an idea.
I'm very wary of trying to use traditional liability law in the software industry. I fear that, if software liability is implemented (and it WILL be implemented) in a traditional manner, the ultimate casualty will be openness, not pocketbooks.
Use of traditional liability law would almost certainly make development of truly open and free software impossible. Even if the producers of free software are allowed a large amount of protection from litigation, very few will use it precisely because they will have no recourse should they be affected by a defect in such software.
As far as the broader software industry in general is concerned, it would shut tight as a trap. Many people have put in alot of hard work to get software companies to be more forthcoming with regards to defects, especially as they relate to security. This hard work has paid off quite well. It has made our lives much easier. Do we want to return to the days when it was next to impossible to get patches, let alone information on what the problem actually is? If sofware companies are made liable for defects in a traditional manner, only a select few will have access to bug announcements, and then they will only have access under a NDA. Life will become extremely difficult for those of us responsible for making sure machines are running and secure. Any public acknowledgement of a bug could then be possible grounds for a lawsuit, which is just a bad place to be. Any information we would get would normally be a result of a law suit, and probably too late to be of any real use. I value the amount of information I have access to. It has saved me countless hours, and I don't want to see that go away.
We need to find some way to induce some sort of liability for non-criminally negligent defects without sacrificing openness. Will this work? I think it has a chance to.
Here's to hoping
on
HP Buys Compaq
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
There's lots of reasons this could be REALLY bad, but there is a snowballs chance in hell that it could work.
On the higer-end (PC-servers and up), this may bode quite well...
HP has always had great technology, but has generally lacked the capability to take the tech they came up with and get it into a good product (certain printer lines being an exception).
Compaq, OTOH, has never been much of a technology developer, preferring to buy other companies that have already done the lions share of the R&D. Compaq has been able to take that tech and turn it into (generally) good products.
On the desktop end, it doesn't really matter that much, though hopefully the Proliant's stick around instead of the HP line for the higher end desktops. The low-end consumer stuff is screwed no matter which way they cut it.
As for the rest of it, there is a huge amount of overlap in the product lines. That's obviously bad for Alpha, which kinda sucks, but kinda doesn't. The overlap is also going to mean some killer layoffs at some point down the road. Hopefully the *nix pieces get combined in some manner, instead of just cutting one side of it. On second thought, maybe they can finally take the opportunity to put HP-UX out of it's (and our) misery. I'd like to see their Linux efforts continue for sure. I'm not at all familiar with Tru-64.
Who knows, it's possible that this will be good for the tech industry. It certainly could be, and I, for one, hope it will be.
Interesting concept, be interesting to see how they solve authentication/non-repudiation issues, seeing as those are kinda important if this is going to work.
Though after living here for all 27 years of my life, I question the sanity of anyone wanting to start anything real in this god forsaken place. Everyone involved would go crazy after a couple winters.
As for Detroit, it's gunna take a hell of alot more than this to transform that giant, soul sucking stink pit of humanity into something that wouldn't be better off as a toxic waste dump. Wait, it already is, thanks to the auto companies that have now abandonded it, leaving us to clean up after their asses.
At the moment, they are unable to release source code for it due to copyright issues with Pangolin. Could try convincing Pangolin to do something about this. Maybe they can release the code they're in binary form, which would allow these guys to release their source.
WHAT??? You've gotta be from Taylor or something. I've lived in AA for 24 years and that's a load of crap. 20 minutes from Ann Arbor to Metro Airport when traffic's good, and that's not even half way to Detroit.
Abcess slaps BigBlockMopar around with a Corvair (or any other Detroit automobile from the 70's)
UM has good Engineering schools, yes, but it's hardly the intellectual capital of the world, and most of it's other (though, not all) undergrad programs are crappy. It's grad programs are much better in general.
As far as the auto industry goes, the big 3 seem to borrow quite a bit from the rest of the world as well, took 'em long enough to figure out how to build a car that lasted as long as the Japanese and Europeans cars. Blah, blah, motor capital of the world. What about pollution capital of the world? There are large tracts of detroit and surrounding area that the auto industry has abandoned, leaving someone else (read, the taxpayers) to pay for the clean up. Somehow, the mention of 'The Big Three' and 'innovation' in the same sentance makes me think of M$.
Anyways, yes Ann Arbor is a pretty good place to live, especially if you're in academia, want to raise kids in a nice place, or hang out with a bunch of yuppies.
Alot of the issues with interference that have been raised have already been solved. Some wavelengths are not affected by rain/fog/smog, namely infared as has already been mentioned. Though snow/ice/hail being crystaline structures seem like they could present a problem if the downfall were dense enough. Birds and other solid objects would only present a momentary break in the signal which can be both quickly and easily taken care of by a number of known methods.
One problem that i haven't seen brought up is that of radiant heat. The tops of buildings tend to get very hot, especially during summer. The heat radiating off the tops of the buildings will likely cause problems for any wavelength as it causes refraction of the light. Locating the lasers at the edges of the buildings involved and being able to keep the beam from getting too close to the tops of buildings in between should at least help keep the effective bandwidth up.
Previous mention of crystals getting in the path actually gave me a neat idea. While it's unlikely that a crystal would remain in the path of the laser (unless placed there purposefully ), it seems possible that you would be able to effectively split the beam (and therefore bandwith) using a crystal or mirrors of some sort, though doing so would be expensive as the implementation would be specific to each site and require alot of engineering each time around. There's probably some interesting properties of non-linear optics that could be exploited, but it seems like the lasers used for this specific implementation aren't high enough intensity to do so.
As far as I can tell, the 'plasma laces' are just EL (electro-luminescent) wire, which is really neat stuff. Phosphorous + wire in tube == FUN!!
Wanna make your own? Cool Neon has pre-made kits as well as parts for those so inclined. There's a couple other sites i've found, but the bookmarks are at home, and I'm at work:(. $25 for 10' of wire, $7.50 for a driver that'll take care of 30' of wire (Disclaimer: I am not an employee, just a satisfied customer). The price of the wire seems pretty consistent, other places have other drivers that will do stuff besides just make them glow (blink, chase...)
I couldn't agree with this more. Many of the cases that involve technology that are occuring right now will shape our lives for a long time to come. There are many legal precedents being set in regards to how law and technology will work together. I would love to see MS quickly smacked down. However, if a decision is made too quickly, what is the cost of having to go through the process again because the rules were not defined clear enough?
Alot of us live very quickly, we love it, we thrive on it, too much down time and we may as well be dead. However, the entire world cannot function like that, and we shouldn't expect it to. There is a balance created between our world and the world of law.
Optimally, we should continue to push for quicker decisions while recognizing that most of the time it won't (and shouldn't) happen. This will keep the legal side on it's toes and force it to change over time. At the same time, the legal side should continue to push back and resist, while realizing that, over time, change is required and inevitable. Which will keep us in check and force the products and services allowed by technology to become faster, more reliable and ultimately better for all of us. (as a side note, as that happens, alot of 'us' will wander off into other growing areas such as biotech and nanotech, though i think that's quite a ways away)
Heh, how quaint, i think i wanna puke. Big Bro. in the middle all high and mighty, making sure all 'their' people do what they think they should like good little drones. The cute little church to spread philosophy and provide an unspoken guilt trip to anyone who even considers thinking about something outside of the corporate doctrine. Just my.02
Actually, communism does not hold the belief that individuals are subordinate. Stalin and Lenin implemented their own political system, parts of which were inspired by marx and called (or others called it, who knows really) communism. Disney was, IMNSHO a fascist. Though not a very militant one, alot of his thoughts relating to people and politics were very fascist, even though he may not have thought so.
Hmmm, I won't deny the possiblity of this, though i must say, i will be really disappointed if Linus' involvement is merely a marketing tool. Also, if it does turn out to be a joke, i will be far less than impressed, the exception to that being if it's been intended as a joke all along. That would actually amuse me greatly, even though i know the jokes on me in a way. Interesting bit of sociology/psychology to study too.
Anyway, my curiosity is definately piqued, and i really want to see what they come up with. I hope it really is something uber-cool. Guess we all get to wait and see, and even if your of the opinion that it's all a big prank, the suspense will likely be insane.
Agreed on that one. Though it is rather poetic, two of the largest examples of techno-mediocrity jumping in bed together. I'm just glad there are other electronics stores around. The shock of going in to RadioTrash and seeing and seeing M$ crap all over the place could be life threatening.
What downsides? Well, to start off with, it ONLY protects trademark owners, at least from what i've read on the bill in question. That specific issue is already resolved by existing trademark law, and even if this bill is passed, it seems likely that the parties involved will still end up in court.
Hopefully, if this thing becomes law, the courts won't interpret it to mean "you can no longer register trademarked words, even if you have no malicious intent
This WILL happen if it gets passed, and seems to be another step towards degrading fair usage for parodies, etc. Also, even as it stands now, even if you do register a trademarked name with no malicious intent, it's likely that you will be relieved of that via the courts, though it does depend on alot of stuff.
It really seems to me that this is merely yet another example of the gov't pandering to corporate interests. Unfortunately it seems like this law actually solves nothing that existing law does not, and Clinton is probably right in saying that the issue is best resolved in the courts (though that idea was probably 'suggested' by the law lobby)
I find domain squatting to be a gross abuse of the system, similar to buying large tracts of land and sitting on them, hoping the area becomes a popular place for development, though there are alot of differences. The extremely low cost of entry is one. I really don't see being able to completely remove the practice. Eventually it will become very costly to maintain all those domains they register, i'm sure a couple decent sized companies will still manage to make money off of it though, i think it's called 'the price of doing business'. Personally it sickens me, but then again, doing business is really unpleasant.
Some apps will work with IPv6 without needing changes, but it depends what set of functions they are using. If they use the updated IP functions and write their code the right way, transparent protocol support is possible. Alot of code i've seen uses the older functions, which is fine for the moment, and tends to be simpler to implement, some programs are using the newer functions, but don't do so in a way that allows use of IPv6, there are some really good books on how to do this (UNIX Network Programming Vol. 1 is what i generally use as a reference).
That said, there are also some other issues, such as people upgrading to BIND 8 for DNS stuff, implementation maturity, to name a couple.
Fair is fair??? I fail to see how this would be fair to ISPs. All the telcos are also offering ISP services now, they are NOT offering Long Distance services, and they (in general) can't because they're being greedy about 'their' network.
Also, most modem users have a separate line for their modem, so they ARE paying extra as it stands. Not to mention the fact that the telco's make a KILLING in profit just off the normal monthly charge for a voice line. It costs them next to nothing to add additional bandwidth when compared to the profits they get from the extra voice lines.
Oh well, once 2-way cable grows and services actually become available for them, the RBOC's will have to make some big changes. A few megabits on a pair of copper is nice and all, but cable has much nicer bandwidth properties and less interference.
I learned about this project at the Atlanta show during a presentation on the Secure Filesystem project at the University of Minnesota. They are using it extensively for their project, the site for that project is www.securefilesystem.org
BGP uses TCP, but the connections between routers are not constant, they connect periodically to exchange information, mostly routing table updates and to let their neighbors know they're still alive. Besides, open TCP connections are expensive, a router has better things to do most of the time.
Slashdot Mirror
Popsci.com
Earthday.org
American City Business Journals (Sporting News)
BMW, AG
John S. and James L. Knight Foundation
City of Brisbane, Australia
E.W. Scripps & Co.
Spectrum Magazine
Stanford Law School
Coghead
Do Something
BlogHer
One thing related to the pagefile you can do is disable paging the executive. Prevents the kernel from paging certain things, but is only really helpful with 512+ MB of RAM.
There's a registry key for it. You'll have to google for that, as I don't recall it at the moment.
As a matter of fact, you may not be flying at all. It all depends what you're using it for. The problem with SATA is latency, and there's not much that controller is going to do about it. If you've got a server that is performing latency sensitive tasks, then SATA can cause performance problems.
In my experience, if you've got alot of random I/O, SATA is not a viable solution. That said, even if your I/O is mostly random, if there's not a heavy load on the disk, then you're probably ok. If you've got 200 people hitting a database or email server, you're probably going to have some performance problems. Swap it out with SCSI drives, or a quality disk array, and you'll be doing much better. If you've got a web server, or a database server that is exclusively reading, you can probably get away with SATA. Again, it all depends on how much and how random the disk I/O for your application is.
Fine, so this might not be the answer. But does the Economist present any alternative? No. Kinda like someone who complains about something, yet has no idea how to solve the problem.
They should've saved their resources for an article about something they could've been productive about. Economics, for instance.
Working for an insurance company, I'd have to say the first two items are quite important. However, there is alot of misinformation regarding how HIPAA relates to electronically stored data.
First off, file an extension ASAP. We've done so and been given until October 2003 to comply with the currently completed rules.
An important thing to note is that the HIPAA rules are NOT all completed. Most notably the rules regarding data security as relates to data stored and transmitted electronically. This means that there is currently NO DEADLINE for you to electronically secure your data. Additionally, when these rules are completed, there will be a 2 year period during which to become compliant, extensions not withtanding.
Most of the current rules deal with procedural issues and security of information held on paper. Computers can ease some of these issues, but they can also get in the way of timely compliance.
The bottom line? Deal with the regulations that you are faced with, not the ones that aren't there yet.
I've been messing around with IPv6 for a couple years, and reading about it for a couple more, which still puts me behind the curve a bit. Bottom line is this is really new stuff, and the kind of basic information out there is just that, basic, in the same way assembler is basic (though not as basic as straight machine code). There is very little in the way of easy to follow directions, let alone complete network stacks and applications to make use of them. If you want a (mostly) complete IPv6 stack, go with BSD.
6 _tutorial.html. The specifics are BSD oriented, but the concepts apply everywhere.
The best web resource i've found for linux specific information is a HOWTO by Peter Bieringer. It's located at http://www.bieringer.de/linux/IPv6/index.html
http://www.hs247.com/ Has a bunch of links to a ton of information, and is OS agnostic.
One book I've found to be pretty helpful is called IPng and the TCP/IP protocols: Implementing the Next Generation Internet. The first half of the book rambles a bit, but the second half gets down to business quite nicely. It can be a bit technical at points, which I like, but may be a dry for some.
O'Reilly has a good article on 6to4 tunneling at http://www.onlamp.com/pub/a/onlamp/2001/06/01/ipv
If you want to start writing some code that uses IPv6, the ever popular UNIX Network Programming is a great resource.
What about allowing the transferral of costs caused by defects in software at the user level, instead of at the producer level? Insurance does this quite well. The costs of insuring your company (or yourself) against defects would be based on what software you are using. The cost of insuring a given piece of software would be a function of claims paid because a particular piece of software was found at fault. Perhaps, companies could even be allowed protection from software they produce and use internally. There are a number of complexities that I can see arising, but here I'm just presenting this as an idea.
I'm very wary of trying to use traditional liability law in the software industry. I fear that, if software liability is implemented (and it WILL be implemented) in a traditional manner, the ultimate casualty will be openness, not pocketbooks.
Use of traditional liability law would almost certainly make development of truly open and free software impossible. Even if the producers of free software are allowed a large amount of protection from litigation, very few will use it precisely because they will have no recourse should they be affected by a defect in such software.
As far as the broader software industry in general is concerned, it would shut tight as a trap. Many people have put in alot of hard work to get software companies to be more forthcoming with regards to defects, especially as they relate to security. This hard work has paid off quite well. It has made our lives much easier. Do we want to return to the days when it was next to impossible to get patches, let alone information on what the problem actually is? If sofware companies are made liable for defects in a traditional manner, only a select few will have access to bug announcements, and then they will only have access under a NDA. Life will become extremely difficult for those of us responsible for making sure machines are running and secure. Any public acknowledgement of a bug could then be possible grounds for a lawsuit, which is just a bad place to be. Any information we would get would normally be a result of a law suit, and probably too late to be of any real use. I value the amount of information I have access to. It has saved me countless hours, and I don't want to see that go away.
We need to find some way to induce some sort of liability for non-criminally negligent defects without sacrificing openness. Will this work? I think it has a chance to.
There's lots of reasons this could be REALLY bad, but there is a snowballs chance in hell that it could work.
On the higer-end (PC-servers and up), this may bode quite well...
HP has always had great technology, but has generally lacked the capability to take the tech they came up with and get it into a good product (certain printer lines being an exception).
Compaq, OTOH, has never been much of a technology developer, preferring to buy other companies that have already done the lions share of the R&D. Compaq has been able to take that tech and turn it into (generally) good products.
On the desktop end, it doesn't really matter that much, though hopefully the Proliant's stick around instead of the HP line for the higher end desktops. The low-end consumer stuff is screwed no matter which way they cut it.
As for the rest of it, there is a huge amount of overlap in the product lines. That's obviously bad for Alpha, which kinda sucks, but kinda doesn't. The overlap is also going to mean some killer layoffs at some point down the road. Hopefully the *nix pieces get combined in some manner, instead of just cutting one side of it. On second thought, maybe they can finally take the opportunity to put HP-UX out of it's (and our) misery. I'd like to see their Linux efforts continue for sure. I'm not at all familiar with Tru-64.
Who knows, it's possible that this will be good for the tech industry. It certainly could be, and I, for one, hope it will be.
Interesting concept, be interesting to see how they solve authentication/non-repudiation issues, seeing as those are kinda important if this is going to work.
Though after living here for all 27 years of my life, I question the sanity of anyone wanting to start anything real in this god forsaken place. Everyone involved would go crazy after a couple winters.
As for Detroit, it's gunna take a hell of alot more than this to transform that giant, soul sucking stink pit of humanity into something that wouldn't be better off as a toxic waste dump. Wait, it already is, thanks to the auto companies that have now abandonded it, leaving us to clean up after their asses.
At the moment, they are unable to release source code for it due to copyright issues with Pangolin. Could try convincing Pangolin to do something about this. Maybe they can release the code they're in binary form, which would allow these guys to release their source.
WHAT??? You've gotta be from Taylor or something. I've lived in AA for 24 years and that's a load of crap. 20 minutes from Ann Arbor to Metro Airport when traffic's good, and that's not even half way to Detroit.
Abcess slaps BigBlockMopar around with a Corvair (or any other Detroit automobile from the 70's)
UM has good Engineering schools, yes, but it's hardly the intellectual capital of the world, and most of it's other (though, not all) undergrad programs are crappy. It's grad programs are much better in general.
As far as the auto industry goes, the big 3 seem to borrow quite a bit from the rest of the world as well, took 'em long enough to figure out how to build a car that lasted as long as the Japanese and Europeans cars. Blah, blah, motor capital of the world. What about pollution capital of the world? There are large tracts of detroit and surrounding area that the auto industry has abandoned, leaving someone else (read, the taxpayers) to pay for the clean up. Somehow, the mention of 'The Big Three' and 'innovation' in the same sentance makes me think of M$.
Anyways, yes Ann Arbor is a pretty good place to live, especially if you're in academia, want to raise kids in a nice place, or hang out with a bunch of yuppies.
Alot of the issues with interference that have been raised have already been solved. Some wavelengths are not affected by rain/fog/smog, namely infared as has already been mentioned. Though snow/ice/hail being crystaline structures seem like they could present a problem if the downfall were dense enough. Birds and other solid objects would only present a momentary break in the signal which can be both quickly and easily taken care of by a number of known methods.
One problem that i haven't seen brought up is that of radiant heat. The tops of buildings tend to get very hot, especially during summer. The heat radiating off the tops of the buildings will likely cause problems for any wavelength as it causes refraction of the light. Locating the lasers at the edges of the buildings involved and being able to keep the beam from getting too close to the tops of buildings in between should at least help keep the effective bandwidth up.
Previous mention of crystals getting in the path actually gave me a neat idea. While it's unlikely that a crystal would remain in the path of the laser (unless placed there purposefully ), it seems possible that you would be able to effectively split the beam (and therefore bandwith) using a crystal or mirrors of some sort, though doing so would be expensive as the implementation would be specific to each site and require alot of engineering each time around. There's probably some interesting properties of non-linear optics that could be exploited, but it seems like the lasers used for this specific implementation aren't high enough intensity to do so.
Oops, screwed that one up....OH! that's what the preview button is there for
Anyways, decided to take a look at their information for DoubleClick
This place looks worse than the farce that calls themselves TRUSTe.
I would rant, but after seeing what they had to say about DoubleClick, the results seem to speak loud enough.
Decided to take a look at the ir information for DoubleClick
This place looks worse than the farce that calls themselves TRUSTe.
As far as I can tell, the 'plasma laces' are just EL (electro-luminescent) wire, which is really neat stuff. Phosphorous + wire in tube == FUN!!
:(. $25 for 10' of wire, $7.50 for a driver that'll take care of 30' of wire (Disclaimer: I am not an employee, just a satisfied customer). The price of the wire seems pretty consistent, other places have other drivers that will do stuff besides just make them glow (blink, chase...)
Wanna make your own? Cool Neon has pre-made kits as well as parts for those so inclined. There's a couple other sites i've found, but the bookmarks are at home, and I'm at work
I couldn't agree with this more. Many of the cases that involve technology that are occuring right now will shape our lives for a long time to come. There are many legal precedents being set in regards to how law and technology will work together. I would love to see MS quickly smacked down. However, if a decision is made too quickly, what is the cost of having to go through the process again because the rules were not defined clear enough?
Alot of us live very quickly, we love it, we thrive on it, too much down time and we may as well be dead. However, the entire world cannot function like that, and we shouldn't expect it to. There is a balance created between our world and the world of law.
Optimally, we should continue to push for quicker decisions while recognizing that most of the time it won't (and shouldn't) happen. This will keep the legal side on it's toes and force it to change over time. At the same time, the legal side should continue to push back and resist, while realizing that, over time, change is required and inevitable. Which will keep us in check and force the products and services allowed by technology to become faster, more reliable and ultimately better for all of us. (as a side note, as that happens, alot of 'us' will wander off into other growing areas such as biotech and nanotech, though i think that's quite a ways away)
Thanks for the pic! Now a bit of a comment....
.02
Heh, how quaint, i think i wanna puke. Big Bro. in the middle all high and mighty, making sure all 'their' people do what they think they should like good little drones. The cute little church to spread philosophy and provide an unspoken guilt trip to anyone who even considers thinking about something outside of the corporate doctrine. Just my
Actually, communism does not hold the belief that individuals are subordinate. Stalin and Lenin implemented their own political system, parts of which were inspired by marx and called (or others called it, who knows really) communism. Disney was, IMNSHO a fascist. Though not a very militant one, alot of his thoughts relating to people and politics were very fascist, even though he may not have thought so.
Hmmm, I won't deny the possiblity of this, though i must say, i will be really disappointed if Linus' involvement is merely a marketing tool. Also, if it does turn out to be a joke, i will be far less than impressed, the exception to that being if it's been intended as a joke all along. That would actually amuse me greatly, even though i know the jokes on me in a way. Interesting bit of sociology/psychology to study too.
Anyway, my curiosity is definately piqued, and i really want to see what they come up with. I hope it really is something uber-cool. Guess we all get to wait and see, and even if your of the opinion that it's all a big prank, the suspense will likely be insane.
Agreed on that one. Though it is rather poetic, two of the largest examples of techno-mediocrity jumping in bed together. I'm just glad there are other electronics stores around. The shock of going in to RadioTrash and seeing and seeing M$ crap all over the place could be life threatening.
What downsides? Well, to start off with, it ONLY protects trademark owners, at least from what i've read on the bill in question. That specific issue is already resolved by existing trademark law, and even if this bill is passed, it seems likely that the parties involved will still end up in court.
Hopefully, if this thing becomes law, the courts won't interpret it to mean "you can no longer register trademarked words, even if you have no malicious intent
This WILL happen if it gets passed, and seems to be another step towards degrading fair usage for parodies, etc. Also, even as it stands now, even if you do register a trademarked name with no malicious intent, it's likely that you will be relieved of that via the courts, though it does depend on alot of stuff.
It really seems to me that this is merely yet another example of the gov't pandering to corporate interests. Unfortunately it seems like this law actually solves nothing that existing law does not, and Clinton is probably right in saying that the issue is best resolved in the courts (though that idea was probably 'suggested' by the law lobby)
I find domain squatting to be a gross abuse of the system, similar to buying large tracts of land and sitting on them, hoping the area becomes a popular place for development, though there are alot of differences. The extremely low cost of entry is one. I really don't see being able to completely remove the practice. Eventually it will become very costly to maintain all those domains they register, i'm sure a couple decent sized companies will still manage to make money off of it though, i think it's called 'the price of doing business'. Personally it sickens me, but then again, doing business is really unpleasant.
Some apps will work with IPv6 without needing changes, but it depends what set of functions they are using. If they use the updated IP functions and write their code the right way, transparent protocol support is possible. Alot of code i've seen uses the older functions, which is fine for the moment, and tends to be simpler to implement, some programs are using the newer functions, but don't do so in a way that allows use of IPv6, there are some really good books on how to do this (UNIX Network Programming Vol. 1 is what i generally use as a reference).
That said, there are also some other issues, such as people upgrading to BIND 8 for DNS stuff, implementation maturity, to name a couple.
Fair is fair??? I fail to see how this would be fair to ISPs. All the telcos are also offering ISP services now, they are NOT offering Long Distance services, and they (in general) can't because they're being greedy about 'their' network.
Also, most modem users have a separate line for their modem, so they ARE paying extra as it stands. Not to mention the fact that the telco's make a KILLING in profit just off the normal monthly charge for a voice line. It costs them next to nothing to add additional bandwidth when compared to the profits they get from the extra voice lines.
Oh well, once 2-way cable grows and services actually become available for them, the RBOC's will have to make some big changes. A few megabits on a pair of copper is nice and all, but cable has much nicer bandwidth properties and less interference.
Take a look at M.U.S.C.L.E
I learned about this project at the Atlanta show during a presentation on the Secure Filesystem project at the University of Minnesota. They are using it extensively for their project, the site for that project is www.securefilesystem.org
BGP uses TCP, but the connections between routers are not constant, they connect periodically to exchange information, mostly routing table updates and to let their neighbors know they're still alive. Besides, open TCP connections are expensive, a router has better things to do most of the time.