I'm thinking about switching, I currently use buckeye-express and basic cable which means I pay about $60/mo. DSL seems to be around $30/mo for 384-1.5mbps speeds. What do you seem to get closer to? I tend to get closer to the 1.5mbps mark with cable, and that's my only concern with DSL. Plus, I'm about 2 miles from the nearest office, which is seems pretty far in terms of DSL anyway..
Wow....I bet a Canadian company could make a fortune selling high speed Internet access to those in the US, Or possibly just a high speed proxy service.
Then when the RIAA asked them for the user of the IP that is 'stealing' their music...they could tell them to take a flying leap
I was also thinking about this, but technically, in order to listen to the mp3's hosted in Canada you'd still have to download them. And downloading = making a copy, which is what is illegal (right?). So how could you listen to them without downloading? (or streaming.. whatever). At what point is the "crime" committed? When you listen to the music, or when you download it? Is there a distinction?
If you were to call someone in Canada (over the phone) who had a private stash, and played one of the songs over the phone, and you recorded it onto your computer while it was playing, would that be illegal?
IANAL obviously.. I just think these are interesting questions.
Uh, dude. The wall-crawler (i.e. fuselage inspector) uses a fan to create a low pressure area between it & the surface its crawling. Without an incredibly powerful fan, it won't work on a flying aircraft. Do I have to say anything about the absence of air in space?
Obviously, modifications would have to be made for this to work in space or even flight. I'm thinking something in terms of magnetics or suction cups with an oxygyn tank (I'll leave that as an exercise for you to figure out). Shouldn't be too difficult of a modification, regardless..
One of the articles linked talked about people currently buying these things:
People have bought it just the way it is for things like inspecting the fuselage of an aircraft," Wiedeman said.
We are one step closer to having R2D2! I wonder if the robots can crawl around while the plane is in flight? (Probably not, based on the specs given). Anyway, I think this is pretty interesting. Using these on a space shuttle might not be a bad idea, ie- crawling around outside and inspecting things before take off. And later- making external in-flight repairs...
Actually, I did remember it was BA, but I always hit BAB so that's true, you don't actually need the extra B.
Technically, you need to hit select-start to actually GET the lives (otherwise you're just sitting there at the start screen):) I guess if you were playing on one player, you'd just need to hit start but who wants to play with just one player??:{
The spammers will find a way to get around the tax. What's to stop them from getting around the tax? I think there is also a huge problem from an auditing perspective. How do you know who truly sent the e-mail? You'd have to specifically which person the e-mail came from. Much easier said than done. Multiple people may use the same machine, you have programs that send e-mail on "behalf" of people (example- any free e-mail web site), etc. There is no 100% way to link a person to their e-mail account.
My biggest concern however is that this will open a bigger can of worms. As soon as the government gets the idea in their head that they can tax e-mail, what's next? A tax on browsing slashdot and posting messages? A tax to posting in the newsgroups? etc. It's a slippery slope. Information should be free and untaxed, otherwise the internet will cease to be what it is. Maybe "internet2" could be taxed, but I'm all for freedom of information.
I'd hardly equate it with version 1.0 software. Last time I checked, Windows has been around for awhile and they reuse code. Modern Windows is much more mature than Windows of the previous decade. A better analogy would be a.0 release of RedHat - wait for the.1 or.2
I wasn't trying to imply that 1.0 is a bad thing, just that there are a lot of new things that make it unlike its forebearers.
From my understanding, a significant part of it has been revamped/rewritten. At least in terms of the web side of things (I'm a developer so I know that much), it means an entirely new version of IIS that runs a completely different process model. Undoubtedly a lot of core server applications will also be written in the.NET framework which is essentially a new platform. It's kind of like saying VB.NET is really VB version 7.0, which would be quite a stretch. Going from COM to.NET is like going from DOS to Windows. Anyway, it's possible that Windows.NET Server is not quite *that* significant of a move, but I think it is probably more significant than going from NT to 2000 was. This page highlights a list of them.
I would say the odds, of a non-technical company, such as the automotive industry, to switch over to linux are probably the same odds you have at winning the lottery. Major corporations that don't know computers, don't take risks with a piece of software that is almost completely impossible to get support for.
There's definitely truth to that but I don't know that the odds are that slim:) A lot of it also depends on the kind of software they run on there (such as MRP), which chances are probably won't run on Linux. However, most servers that run outside of a firewall (which would be those affected) are either mail servers or web servers, both of which should be relatively easy to switch over.
Wow, good timing! I just wonder how many network admins will get ticked off that MS didn't fix NT so they're going to try out something else for a change (ie, enter Linux). Most companies aren't willing to jump to a new server OS for mission critical applications, which is most likely WHY anyone would still have NT running. Very few people are comfortable running version 1.0 server software, which is essentially what this is.
I think it is a bit irresponsible for them to NOT support NT, and I just don't by the "too complex" architecture bit. Honestly, I think they don't want to fix it- it's time to move customers to the next version. They could come out with a really heavy service pack, but that probably doesn't make much business sense. It's likely they have a good grip on how many people are running NT still-- perhaps losing those customers are probably cheaper than doing another service pack? In addition, the only companies that REALLY need to be concerned are those that can't block the appropriate port with a firewall since that is a temporary fix.
This is the 10th year birthday of the web using a decent tool-- but it is also Einstien's birthday (14 March, 1879), google has a cool einstien image.
Is that a cool coincidence or what? Must be something special about March 14th. Here's an interesting site of other events that happened today in history. Among them I found the following interesting:
TODAY IS ALSO THE RIAA's BIRTHDAY!! HOW SCARRY!!
1958 RIAA (Recording Industry Association of American)is created and certifies 1st gold record (Perry Como's Catch A Falling Star)
1950 FBI's "10 Most Wanted Fugitives" program begins
1967 JFK's body moved from temporary grave to a permanent memorial 1971 The Rolling Stones leave England for France to escape taxes 1995 1st time 13 people in space 1997 President Clinton trips & tears up his knee requiring surgery
In my experience, back doors tend to be "in the mind of the programmer" as opposed to code that was physically made to be that way. It's not that the programmer sat there and added a way to hack in-- it's just the fact that since he knows how the system works, he knows how to gain access if need be. After all, just about everything electronic can be exploited at some point.
I think you really have to consider the intent. If someone tries to go into the code and deliberately put a back door in w/o proper decision authority, that should be considered unethical. If the client wants it tighter than Fort Knox and loses the key, it's not your fault.
I certainly don't claim to be an expert on patents. I, like many other slashdotters, probably can't imagine how the patent office can award a patent for something like what was mentioned in this article and just want to be heard. Without knowing all that much about patents, it seems obvious that there is something seriously wrong with the system if stuff like this happens.
Heck, if the patent office posted to slashdot they'd have much better knowledge that what they do now in regards to prior art...:)
In all seriousness, what would you recommend to make things better since you have some experience in this area?
A recruiter for the patent office told me that the system is setup to let patents through. Reviewers aren't given enough time to do their job properly.
I don't know a whole lot about the patent system and how their processes are, but I'm guessing they probably need to have more specialized "patent researchers" along with the time (as you suggest) to do their job. Perhaps another idea is to make the patent office a corporation (like what NASA did) that can be held somewhat responsible for patents that tie up the court systems.
I think the patents should be reformed in the following way:
1. Submit the patent idea to the patent office- as a "pending patent".
2. Patent office does a search (web or otherwise) on prior art, billing the individual/corporation that submits the patent at a standard rate. If no prior art is found, the patent office does not bill. The company is able to challenge any claims to prior art. Each challenge to a claim at prior art costs a certain fee.
3. Patent is awarded to the individual/corporation.
Basically the idea behind this is that companies will be charged for their stupidity. It will discourage patents on ideas that are already "out there" (patented or not). At the same time, it will *not* discourage individuals from ligitimate patents as they will be reimbursed for the "prior art search fee".
In addition, the Patent Office still gets its money and they begin providing real value.
Until something like this happens, we will all have to groan as the patent office continues to do stupid stuff and lawyers get richer.
I don't see why you couldn't do that with C#... You can also use the TCPClient base class and implement call backs to handle multiple listeners on the same socket. For example:
Hasn't this been done before?
on
Peephole Displays
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
I remember hearing about something with a hand held device that was gyroscope enabled that allowed you to do something similar (and this was about 2 years ago I think). If you tilt the device to the left, it scrolled to the left and so on. I don't have the URL handy, but it doesn't seem to me like this is that new of a concept.. unless I'm missing something (unfortunately the site is too slashdotted to read right now)
Well, as far as the languages go there is nothing earth-shattering (other than they are all OO now, but OO has been around for a while). However, with the.NET platform (VB and C# comprise part of it anyway) you can write any language and compile down to the same byte code. I'd say there is some innovation in that sense. OK, not exactly groundbreaking.. but technically, you could say the same thing about Perl (why narrow it down to C#/VB- is that a stench of bigotry in the air?)
Besides, the original poster asked about software innovations, which may be different than computer science theories.
I don't think the fundies are out to distor the teaching of 'science' I think they just want to make the assumptions of science based on the Bible.
As far as falling behind in the sciences, I don't see how that is correlated. There are many Scientists who believe the Bible is true and have done some great things for medicine/science in recent times. Also, by falling behind do you mean as compared to other countries?
Although this is an obvious troll, I'll bite only because the date is wrong. The Bible would actually put the age of the beginning somewhere around 6,000 years.
Those that would steal their hard work because "Science is for everyone" doesn't quite grasp the concept of the reward system.
I agree. The core argument here is not "is science for everyone" but "is marxism for everyone". This is America, and we are in a free market/competitive economic system. The minute you start forcing stuff to be "free as in beer" you are going to run into problems. Open Source / Free software is a little different because there is still a sense of competition/market forces at work (ie, support costs of running it- the govt doesn't force it to "work" for you). The people proposing this already have a lot of accomplishments (nobel Laureate, Ivy League) and are probably filthy rich. So what do they care about it being free or not? Again, it's not about science, it's about politics.
If everyone ceased to have a "carrot to keep them motivated" we would end up with a marxist, communist society. In Soviet Russia, science researches you!
So if someone gives me their lawnmower, I can assume they won't mind me clearing out the rest of their garage?
I think the question is more "If someone tells me how to build a lawnmower, they won't mind if I do?"
And the answer to that would most likely be no.. Besides, the "lawnmower" that Mono is building isn't a Toro tractor mower, it's more like a push-behind Craftsman.
Slashdot Mirror
Cool, another Toledo slashdotter.
I'm thinking about switching, I currently use buckeye-express and basic cable which means I pay about $60/mo. DSL seems to be around $30/mo for 384-1.5mbps speeds. What do you seem to get closer to? I tend to get closer to the 1.5mbps mark with cable, and that's my only concern with DSL. Plus, I'm about 2 miles from the nearest office, which is seems pretty far in terms of DSL anyway..
Wow....I bet a Canadian company could make a fortune selling high speed Internet access to those in the US, Or possibly just a high speed proxy service.
Then when the RIAA asked them for the user of the IP that is 'stealing' their music...they could tell them to take a flying leap
I was also thinking about this, but technically, in order to listen to the mp3's hosted in Canada you'd still have to download them. And downloading = making a copy, which is what is illegal (right?). So how could you listen to them without downloading? (or streaming.. whatever). At what point is the "crime" committed? When you listen to the music, or when you download it? Is there a distinction?
If you were to call someone in Canada (over the phone) who had a private stash, and played one of the songs over the phone, and you recorded it onto your computer while it was playing, would that be illegal?
IANAL obviously.. I just think these are interesting questions.
Uh, dude. The wall-crawler (i.e. fuselage inspector) uses a fan to create a low pressure area between it & the surface its crawling. Without an incredibly powerful fan, it won't work on a flying aircraft. Do I have to say anything about the absence of air in space?
Obviously, modifications would have to be made for this to work in space or even flight. I'm thinking something in terms of magnetics or suction cups with an oxygyn tank (I'll leave that as an exercise for you to figure out). Shouldn't be too difficult of a modification, regardless..
One of the articles linked talked about people currently buying these things:
People have bought it just the way it is for things like inspecting the fuselage of an aircraft," Wiedeman said.
We are one step closer to having R2D2! I wonder if the robots can crawl around while the plane is in flight? (Probably not, based on the specs given). Anyway, I think this is pretty interesting. Using these on a space shuttle might not be a bad idea, ie- crawling around outside and inspecting things before take off. And later- making external in-flight repairs...
Actually, I did remember it was BA, but I always hit BAB so that's true, you don't actually need the extra B.
:) I guess if you were playing on one player, you'd just need to hit start but who wants to play with just one player?? :{
Technically, you need to hit select-start to actually GET the lives (otherwise you're just sitting there at the start screen)
Actually, that would be cool... and the contra code was UUDDLRLRBAB Select Start (you had the ABAB backwards) :)
But... Do we have to use GIMP to design it?? :)
The spammers will find a way to get around the tax. What's to stop them from getting around the tax? I think there is also a huge problem from an auditing perspective. How do you know who truly sent the e-mail? You'd have to specifically which person the e-mail came from. Much easier said than done. Multiple people may use the same machine, you have programs that send e-mail on "behalf" of people (example- any free e-mail web site), etc. There is no 100% way to link a person to their e-mail account.
My biggest concern however is that this will open a bigger can of worms. As soon as the government gets the idea in their head that they can tax e-mail, what's next? A tax on browsing slashdot and posting messages? A tax to posting in the newsgroups? etc. It's a slippery slope. Information should be free and untaxed, otherwise the internet will cease to be what it is. Maybe "internet2" could be taxed, but I'm all for freedom of information.
I'd hardly equate it with version 1.0 software. Last time I checked, Windows has been around for awhile and they reuse code. Modern Windows is much more mature than Windows of the previous decade. A better analogy would be a
I wasn't trying to imply that 1.0 is a bad thing, just that there are a lot of new things that make it unlike its forebearers.
From my understanding, a significant part of it has been revamped/rewritten. At least in terms of the web side of things (I'm a developer so I know that much), it means an entirely new version of IIS that runs a completely different process model. Undoubtedly a lot of core server applications will also be written in the
Hope that clarifies
I would say the odds, of a non-technical company, such as the automotive industry, to switch over to linux are probably the same odds you have at winning the lottery. Major corporations that don't know computers, don't take risks with a piece of software that is almost completely impossible to get support for.
There's definitely truth to that but I don't know that the odds are that slim
Wow, good timing! I just wonder how many network admins will get ticked off that MS didn't fix NT so they're going to try out something else for a change (ie, enter Linux). Most companies aren't willing to jump to a new server OS for mission critical applications, which is most likely WHY anyone would still have NT running. Very few people are comfortable running version 1.0 server software, which is essentially what this is.
I think it is a bit irresponsible for them to NOT support NT, and I just don't by the "too complex" architecture bit. Honestly, I think they don't want to fix it- it's time to move customers to the next version. They could come out with a really heavy service pack, but that probably doesn't make much business sense. It's likely they have a good grip on how many people are running NT still-- perhaps losing those customers are probably cheaper than doing another service pack? In addition, the only companies that REALLY need to be concerned are those that can't block the appropriate port with a firewall since that is a temporary fix.
This is the 10th year birthday of the web using a decent tool-- but it is also Einstien's birthday (14 March, 1879), google has a cool einstien image.
Is that a cool coincidence or what? Must be something special about March 14th.
Here's an interesting site of other events that happened today in history. Among them I found the following interesting:
TODAY IS ALSO THE RIAA's BIRTHDAY!! HOW SCARRY!!
1958 RIAA (Recording Industry Association of American)is created and certifies 1st gold record (Perry Como's Catch A Falling Star)
1950 FBI's "10 Most Wanted Fugitives" program begins
1967 JFK's body moved from temporary grave to a permanent memorial
1971 The Rolling Stones leave England for France to escape taxes
1995 1st time 13 people in space
1997 President Clinton trips & tears up his knee requiring surgery
In my experience, back doors tend to be "in the mind of the programmer" as opposed to code that was physically made to be that way. It's not that the programmer sat there and added a way to hack in-- it's just the fact that since he knows how the system works, he knows how to gain access if need be. After all, just about everything electronic can be exploited at some point.
I think you really have to consider the intent. If someone tries to go into the code and deliberately put a back door in w/o proper decision authority, that should be considered unethical. If the client wants it tighter than Fort Knox and loses the key, it's not your fault.
I certainly don't claim to be an expert on patents. I, like many other slashdotters, probably can't imagine how the patent office can award a patent for something like what was mentioned in this article and just want to be heard. Without knowing all that much about patents, it seems obvious that there is something seriously wrong with the system if stuff like this happens.
:)
Heck, if the patent office posted to slashdot they'd have much better knowledge that what they do now in regards to prior art...
In all seriousness, what would you recommend to make things better since you have some experience in this area?
A recruiter for the patent office told me that the system is setup to let patents through. Reviewers aren't given enough time to do their job properly.
I don't know a whole lot about the patent system and how their processes are, but I'm guessing they probably need to have more specialized "patent researchers" along with the time (as you suggest) to do their job. Perhaps another idea is to make the patent office a corporation (like what NASA did) that can be held somewhat responsible for patents that tie up the court systems.
I think the patents should be reformed in the following way:
1. Submit the patent idea to the patent office- as a "pending patent".
2. Patent office does a search (web or otherwise) on prior art, billing the individual/corporation that submits the patent at a standard rate. If no prior art is found, the patent office does not bill. The company is able to challenge any claims to prior art. Each challenge to a claim at prior art costs a certain fee.
3. Patent is awarded to the individual/corporation.
Basically the idea behind this is that companies will be charged for their stupidity. It will discourage patents on ideas that are already "out there" (patented or not). At the same time, it will *not* discourage individuals from ligitimate patents as they will be reimbursed for the "prior art search fee".
In addition, the Patent Office still gets its money and they begin providing real value.
Until something like this happens, we will all have to groan as the patent office continues to do stupid stuff and lawyers get richer.
I don't see why you couldn't do that with C#... You can also use the TCPClient base class and implement call backs to handle multiple listeners on the same socket. For example:
r l= /library/en-us/dnadvnet/html/vbnet08142001.asp
http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/default.asp?u
I remember hearing about something with a hand held device that was gyroscope enabled that allowed you to do something similar (and this was about 2 years ago I think). If you tilt the device to the left, it scrolled to the left and so on. I don't have the URL handy, but it doesn't seem to me like this is that new of a concept.. unless I'm missing something (unfortunately the site is too slashdotted to read right now)
Well, as far as the languages go there is nothing earth-shattering (other than they are all OO now, but OO has been around for a while). However, with the .NET platform (VB and C# comprise part of it anyway) you can write any language and compile down to the same byte code. I'd say there is some innovation in that sense. OK, not exactly groundbreaking.. but technically, you could say the same thing about Perl (why narrow it down to C#/VB- is that a stench of bigotry in the air?)
Besides, the original poster asked about software innovations, which may be different than computer science theories.
Anders Hejlsberg the creator of C# (and Delphi?)
:)
- the "Hejlsberg" room
Larry Wall the creator of Perl
- the "wall" room?
Alan Cooper "father of VB"
- the "Closet"?
I don't think the fundies are out to distor the teaching of 'science' I think they just want to make the assumptions of science based on the Bible.
As far as falling behind in the sciences, I don't see how that is correlated. There are many Scientists who believe the Bible is true and have done some great things for medicine/science in recent times. Also, by falling behind do you mean as compared to other countries?
Doh, you got me there..
Although this is an obvious troll, I'll bite only because the date is wrong. The Bible would actually put the age of the beginning somewhere around 6,000 years.
e s/docs/v23n1_earth_how_old.asp
n g.asp
Good article, also trying to explain why current aging methods (such as carbon dating) are not accurate: http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/magazin
Main page for other articles: http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/you
Those that would steal their hard work because "Science is for everyone" doesn't quite grasp the concept of the reward system.
I agree. The core argument here is not "is science for everyone" but "is marxism for everyone". This is America, and we are in a free market/competitive economic system. The minute you start forcing stuff to be "free as in beer" you are going to run into problems. Open Source / Free software is a little different because there is still a sense of competition/market forces at work (ie, support costs of running it- the govt doesn't force it to "work" for you). The people proposing this already have a lot of accomplishments (nobel Laureate, Ivy League) and are probably filthy rich. So what do they care about it being free or not? Again, it's not about science, it's about politics.
If everyone ceased to have a "carrot to keep them motivated" we would end up with a marxist, communist society. In Soviet Russia, science researches you!
So if someone gives me their lawnmower, I can assume they won't mind me clearing out the rest of their garage?
I think the question is more "If someone tells me how to build a lawnmower, they won't mind if I do?"
And the answer to that would most likely be no.. Besides, the "lawnmower" that Mono is building isn't a Toro tractor mower, it's more like a push-behind Craftsman.