Come on, let's all revert to the bubble sort! But seriously, you are right. Not optimizing code is ridiculous. I have jobs that take 40 cores 6 months to execute (spread over 10 machines at the moment.) If by optimizing code I can drop that to 3 months, it's a huge win. Unfortunately, it's commercial closed source code and we can't fix it, and so we currently have a team working on rewriting the code using open-source / tools and we can release the improvements back to the community so that everyone benefits.
After you've been married a while, you go to parties to ESCAPE talking to girls (or "a particular girl"...:-) Instead you may relax in your friends "Man Town" in the basement where he built a mahogany bar, setup the large screen, poker table, etc. and commiserate over the fact that your wives are draining the bank account because they decided for the 3rd time this year that the curtains in the living room just HAVE to be changed, that your teen kid busted through the end of the garage with the car, etc. Yes son, there is life after video games...
Keep in mind that many of those tasks are also very I/O intensive, and our disk speed has not kept up with processor speed. With more cores doing more things, we are going to need a HELL of a lot more bandwidth on the bus for network, memory, disk, graphics, etc. PCI SuperDuper Express anyone?
I think you need to get some professional help. Are you really unable to have an Adult discussion? Or are you just trolling?
Seems as though you failed to address most of my other datapoints but seemed to focus on exchange, I'll bite on that. The majority of major businesses ARE on Exchange, Groupwise, or Notes. There are multiple exchange connectors that do push just fine, such as the blackberry server and Goodlink. Having a PDA connector for your corporate groupware system is quite important to corporate users. Obviously you don't have a clue as to what is out there, or what people in corporate environments are buying. If push is so overrated (sounds like you haven't used it) then why is apple touting it so loudly?
Go take a look at the prices of other smartphones, *none* of which have specs that come within the same solar system as the iPhone.
While I wouldn't use it personally, The moto Q goes for $99. The latest blackberry runs $300. All are under $400. As for specs, your right, the iPhone isn't in the same solar system. It's missing too many features that I listed in my previous post (all the ones you ignored.)
You obviously have very little experience in the business world.
Your right, it's only been about 20 very successful years being a step away in the tree from the CEO at various companies. You wouldn't last long in my organization. Doesn't get along well with others, prima donna, vulgar language - Action: Termination
iPhone not a business/enterprise PDA phone? WTF, are you smoking dope?
To stoop to a lame personal attack that has no basis in fact shows that you still have yet to develop the ability to have a reasonable adult conversation, but I will spell things out to you anyway...
IMAP access to exchange for corporate users is not enough. It's not push. Ever used goodlink on a PDA or a blackberry with the exchange connector? The calendar on the iphone does NOT have exchange calendar support. Hate to break it to you, but the corporate world does (with VERY VERY few exceptions) does not use iCal Server. The google maps app on my Treo is no different than the demo Steve showed in his prior keynote. I can search, scroll, click on phone numbers to dial, pull addresses out and put them in the address book... Exactly how do you think it's different?
I freely admit that the iPhone has a better screen, UI, browser, and mmedia player. Those things are not enough when it comes to the needs of business users.
For the iphone to be viable for business it has to have a true open SDK that allows native offline apps to be written. It needs a user (easily) replaceable battery - especially with the announced battery life (I carry several spares when I travel.) It needs tethering support. It needs a real keyboard (slide-out would be nice.) It needs to have alternate carriers supported. It needs 3G (Edge is pathetic.) It needs to support word / excel viewing at a minimum (which it may do, but it has never been announced or demoed.)
One thing to note about all the iPhone demos... I STRONGLY suspect that they have been using wifi and not Edge. Why? Everything was WAY too fast for it to be Edge - I've used Edge, and it's quite slow. Better than a modem, but not by much due to the latency.
I fully expect other phone manufacturers are already working on adding better screens, improving the UI, and adding decent browsers, and doing so with open SDK phones at 2/3rds to 1/2 the price.
Oh, but maybe you just didn't realize that there are an awful lot of people that get paid a hell of a lot of money working for large enterprises that actually use Macs as their primary computers?
Well, I do too, and am looking forward to Leopard. That doesn't mean that I'm going to buy an iPhone if it doesn't meet my business needs, much like I won't buy an appleTV, because it too fails to meet my needs (no capture / SD support.) I fully believe that apple fanatics that Must Buy Everything Apple will buy the iPhone. I also believe that savvy business users who do more work that just surfing the net and reading email will not. BTW, all those business users that use macs (myself included?) Less than 6% of the market. Statistically, we mean Very little.
But hey, refuse to acknowledge reality. That's your choice.
And I understand that bluetooth enabled phones are equally crippled.
Yes, they are crippled in a way that requires you to go into the service menu and turn it on. So by "crippled" you mean "disabled by default", then yes.
Considering that you can get an LG cable and software elsewhere, it really is a non-issue. But the LG phones are exactly that, phones, and can't do too much. On the other hand, Verizon Smartphones, like the treo, blackberry, Q, etc. all can run any just about any third party app you want, including freely downloadable apps. You can also write your own app. Bluetooth on VZW smartphones work fine - I sync and use my phone as a broadband connection via my laptop and bluetooth just fine.
ALL cell phone providers suck. Some just suck a little less. AT&T and Sprint have bad networks where I am... Verizon has by FAR the best coverage in the area. I would be willing to sacrifice that coverage IF the iPhone had a REAL open SDK, 3G, and a few other minor things. But it doesn't, so it's useless to me.
FYI, the best 3G is about as fast as the slowest DSL offering. Edge is even slower than that. Edge IS better than a modem, but due to high latency it's only marginally better.
But wasn't the newton open for development? Didn't it have expansion slots? User Replaceable batteries? Why Yes. Yes it did. All characteristics the iPhone doesn't share.
I see the iPhone market as a high-end normal cell phone for consumers. It's an upgrade to the Razr, not the Treo or Blackberry. It is a consumer phone with consumer level email / web / ipod, not an business / enterprise PDA phone. Unfortunately, it has an enterprise price and requires business price point service plans. So far, Apple has done everything possible to push away the business user market without explicitly saying that it is doing so. They have also pushed away the pro-sumer market too with the restrictions it has. I really don't understand it.
When I first saw the original keynote demo, I damn near drooled all over my keyboard. At this point however, you couldn't get me to switch to it from my treo even if you paid me to do so. Why? While it may have a far better UI / browser, It just can't do what my Treo does. It's not 3G, It's not open, etc. etc.
http://www.mass.gov/legis/laws/mgl/266-120f.htm
Whoever, without authorization, knowingly accesses a computer system by any means, or after gaining access to a computer system by any means knows that such access is not authorized and fails to terminate such access, shall be punished by imprisonment in the house of correction for not more than thirty days or by a fine of not more than one thousand dollars, or both. Did the RIAA access his computer without authorization? I think so.
Furthermore, in http://www.abanet.org/buslaw/committees/CL320010pu b/newsletter/0009/:
These statutes do not have an equivalent presumption that use is authorized if the network operator does not use security measures. However, these statutes imply that silence does not indicate a lack of authorization. If silence rendered access unauthorized, the express presumption that adoption of security measures renders access unauthorized would be unnecessary. Copyright infringement is civil. Trespass is criminal. Why isn't the RIAA getting nailed with criminal trespass?
And if the distributor was not aware of the download and did not offer permission to download, he's still liable? How about a library with a photocopier? Are they liable if someone copies a book or magazine? Or the parent win an unlocked liqueur cabinet, or a homeowner that leaves an ax in an unlocked shed and an insane person starts running around with it chopping peoples heads off?
By that logic, doesn't a library placing a photocopier out in the open for the public to use just like putting a sign up saying "copy anything you want"?
So just put a README in the folder that says that others are NOT allowed to copy the files without permission from the copyright holder... That should be enough.
There is no license. There is only copyright law. A copyright holder may offer a license to BMG to distribute a work, and which you then buy. You own that copy. It's yours. You don't own a license. Copyright law however dictates what you may do with that copy, such as making additional copies and giving them away, but there is no license anywhere in the picture.
And who is the violator? The person you offers the file, or the one that downloads it? The RIAA is claiming the person offering the file is. IMHO they are wrong, much like the library / photocopier / book situation.
If you went and set a stack of CD's on the street that said "take one", no one is going to freak out.
If you had a stack of CD's on your front porch, WELL within your yard, with no such sign, and someone comes up and makes a copy of a CD, are you liable??? That is basically what is happening here.
Just because you have your share open does not mean that you have a "take a copy" sign out...
On the other hand, using a P2P program with all your music on it and available to others IS kind of like putting up a "take a copy" sign. Convincing a judge that you didn't know that your music was available to others may be quite hard to do.
Frankly I find the RIAA's evidence to be dubious. Log files of transactions can be easily faked, much easier and with no sign of alterations. Considering how easy it is to fake such information, how can it possibly be used as evidence? Couldn't I also come up with log files showing that the RIAA's web servers were sharing MP3's with a README that gives me permission? Of course!
Frankly, it's a "he said, she said" situation, and all the RIAA "evidence" should be thrown out as unreliable or hearsay. There is no fingerprint, DNA evidence, photograph, or other such solid evidence at all. This is why emails should not be allowed as evidence. Too easy to fake.
I think I should also point out that one of the reasons that SMTP currently "sucks" is that so few sites abide by the letter and spirit of the RFC's. You have sites with no reverse DNS, sites that have invalid HELO strings, sites that use invalid characters in hostnames, sites that don't wait for responses befor sending the next command, sites that treat permanent errors as temporary, sites that pound on you over and over at a high rate when issued a temporary error, on and on and on. Incompetent mail server programmers and incompetent mail admins are the scourge of the net.
It does make it difficult that in some cases the RFC's are not totally clear, which generally leads to long flamefests on various mailing lists. Some people go by the letter of the RFC's while others try to read in author intent.
The bottom line though is that the RFC's allow you to violate any MUST, SHOULD, MUST NOT, etc. due to "local policy decisions." That allows companies like Hotmail to drop email on the floor with no notification to senders or recipients, companies like Verizon to have insanely short timeouts, etc. Frankly, the big companies are frequently just as bad and sometimes worse than small.
It would be handy to have a SMTP standards tester that mail admins could use to test their systems for basic compliance, and force people to use it (if you are not in the database as having passed, you get rejected.) That will never fly...
Fine. Only send one autoreply. The problem is that 151,345,599 other people may ALSO use your scheme, which still amounts to a DDOS on the joe-job victim.
The only legitimate way to respond to potential spam is during the initial SMTP transaction with a 4xx or 5xx response codes.
Exim has a feature called "fake reject" where you REALLY accept the mail, but also issue a 5xx error to the sender. In that reject message, you can tell the user what to do. End result is ZERO collateral spam unlike your method. This works fairly well, but there are broken / braindead MTA's out there that don't handle any error after DATA correctly, and even worse are the ones that don't propagate your message back to the client intact.
Technological solutions are hard to do RIGHT due to all the potential pitfalls and horrible standards compliance of MTA's / MUA's.
Email isn't an urgent communications medium Why not? Or rather... why shouldn't it be? SMTP is a batch "best effort" protocol. Despite the fact that lots of people pretend it's realtime, it's not. You can also request a return-receipt, but the fact is that the far end client doesn't have to honor your request.
If you want a messaging protocol with assured fast delivery, it's not and won't be SMTP due to the design of SMTP.
Try telling a partner / vendor your email address over the phone using something like that. Good luck. Hell, most have trouble with the domain name portion despite spelling it to them...
Slashdot Mirror
Come on, let's all revert to the bubble sort! But seriously, you are right. Not optimizing code is ridiculous. I have jobs that take 40 cores 6 months to execute (spread over 10 machines at the moment.) If by optimizing code I can drop that to 3 months, it's a huge win. Unfortunately, it's commercial closed source code and we can't fix it, and so we currently have a team working on rewriting the code using open-source / tools and we can release the improvements back to the community so that everyone benefits.
After you've been married a while, you go to parties to ESCAPE talking to girls (or "a particular girl"... :-) Instead you may relax in your friends "Man Town" in the basement where he built a mahogany bar, setup the large screen, poker table, etc. and commiserate over the fact that your wives are draining the bank account because they decided for the 3rd time this year that the curtains in the living room just HAVE to be changed, that your teen kid busted through the end of the garage with the car, etc. Yes son, there is life after video games...
Keep in mind that many of those tasks are also very I/O intensive, and our disk speed has not kept up with processor speed. With more cores doing more things, we are going to need a HELL of a lot more bandwidth on the bus for network, memory, disk, graphics, etc. PCI SuperDuper Express anyone?
What would a duck do with 80 cores? Quack in harmony?
It's a joke son. Gcc is GPLed.
I think you need to get some professional help. Are you really unable to have an Adult discussion? Or are you just trolling?
Seems as though you failed to address most of my other datapoints but seemed to focus on exchange, I'll bite on that. The majority of major businesses ARE on Exchange, Groupwise, or Notes. There are multiple exchange connectors that do push just fine, such as the blackberry server and Goodlink. Having a PDA connector for your corporate groupware system is quite important to corporate users. Obviously you don't have a clue as to what is out there, or what people in corporate environments are buying. If push is so overrated (sounds like you haven't used it) then why is apple touting it so loudly?
Go take a look at the prices of other smartphones, *none* of which have specs that come within the same solar system as the iPhone.
While I wouldn't use it personally, The moto Q goes for $99. The latest blackberry runs $300. All are under $400. As for specs, your right, the iPhone isn't in the same solar system. It's missing too many features that I listed in my previous post (all the ones you ignored.)
You obviously have very little experience in the business world.
Your right, it's only been about 20 very successful years being a step away in the tree from the CEO at various companies. You wouldn't last long in my organization. Doesn't get along well with others, prima donna, vulgar language - Action: Termination
iPhone not a business/enterprise PDA phone? WTF, are you smoking dope?
To stoop to a lame personal attack that has no basis in fact shows that you still have yet to develop the ability to have a reasonable adult conversation, but I will spell things out to you anyway...
IMAP access to exchange for corporate users is not enough. It's not push. Ever used goodlink on a PDA or a blackberry with the exchange connector? The calendar on the iphone does NOT have exchange calendar support. Hate to break it to you, but the corporate world does (with VERY VERY few exceptions) does not use iCal Server. The google maps app on my Treo is no different than the demo Steve showed in his prior keynote. I can search, scroll, click on phone numbers to dial, pull addresses out and put them in the address book... Exactly how do you think it's different?
I freely admit that the iPhone has a better screen, UI, browser, and mmedia player. Those things are not enough when it comes to the needs of business users.
For the iphone to be viable for business it has to have a true open SDK that allows native offline apps to be written. It needs a user (easily) replaceable battery - especially with the announced battery life (I carry several spares when I travel.) It needs tethering support. It needs a real keyboard (slide-out would be nice.) It needs to have alternate carriers supported. It needs 3G (Edge is pathetic.) It needs to support word / excel viewing at a minimum (which it may do, but it has never been announced or demoed.)
One thing to note about all the iPhone demos... I STRONGLY suspect that they have been using wifi and not Edge. Why? Everything was WAY too fast for it to be Edge - I've used Edge, and it's quite slow. Better than a modem, but not by much due to the latency.
I fully expect other phone manufacturers are already working on adding better screens, improving the UI, and adding decent browsers, and doing so with open SDK phones at 2/3rds to 1/2 the price.
Oh, but maybe you just didn't realize that there are an awful lot of people that get paid a hell of a lot of money working for large enterprises that actually use Macs as their primary computers?
Well, I do too, and am looking forward to Leopard. That doesn't mean that I'm going to buy an iPhone if it doesn't meet my business needs, much like I won't buy an appleTV, because it too fails to meet my needs (no capture / SD support.) I fully believe that apple fanatics that Must Buy Everything Apple will buy the iPhone. I also believe that savvy business users who do more work that just surfing the net and reading email will not.
BTW, all those business users that use macs (myself included?) Less than 6% of the market. Statistically, we mean Very little.
But hey, refuse to acknowledge reality. That's your choice.
In an even smaller spot, this picture was found...
And I understand that bluetooth enabled phones are equally crippled.
Yes, they are crippled in a way that requires you to go into the service menu and turn it on. So by "crippled" you mean "disabled by default", then yes.
Considering that you can get an LG cable and software elsewhere, it really is a non-issue. But the LG phones are exactly that, phones, and can't do too much. On the other hand, Verizon Smartphones, like the treo, blackberry, Q, etc. all can run any just about any third party app you want, including freely downloadable apps. You can also write your own app. Bluetooth on VZW smartphones work fine - I sync and use my phone as a broadband connection via my laptop and bluetooth just fine.
Exactly which web-based VNC client doesn't require a JVM? Most all of the really powerful web apps are JAVA based, not javaSCRIPT.
ALL cell phone providers suck. Some just suck a little less. AT&T and Sprint have bad networks where I am... Verizon has by FAR the best coverage in the area. I would be willing to sacrifice that coverage IF the iPhone had a REAL open SDK, 3G, and a few other minor things. But it doesn't, so it's useless to me.
(well, you might be getting paid slightly less in order to pay for it, so you might be paying for it...)
The point of a business paying for your cell service is to make you more productive. If they are cutting your pay too, it's time to fine a new job.
FYI, the best 3G is about as fast as the slowest DSL offering. Edge is even slower than that. Edge IS better than a modem, but due to high latency it's only marginally better.
But wasn't the newton open for development? Didn't it have expansion slots? User Replaceable batteries? Why Yes. Yes it did. All characteristics the iPhone doesn't share.
I see the iPhone market as a high-end normal cell phone for consumers. It's an upgrade to the Razr, not the Treo or Blackberry. It is a consumer phone with consumer level email / web / ipod, not an business / enterprise PDA phone. Unfortunately, it has an enterprise price and requires business price point service plans. So far, Apple has done everything possible to push away the business user market without explicitly saying that it is doing so. They have also pushed away the pro-sumer market too with the restrictions it has. I really don't understand it.
When I first saw the original keynote demo, I damn near drooled all over my keyboard. At this point however, you couldn't get me to switch to it from my treo even if you paid me to do so. Why? While it may have a far better UI / browser, It just can't do what my Treo does. It's not 3G, It's not open, etc. etc.
In a different story, I assert that this is correct, but it depends on the law in your state, since each state is different.
Furthermore, in http://www.abanet.org/buslaw/committees/CL320010p
And if the distributor was not aware of the download and did not offer permission to download, he's still liable? How about a library with a photocopier? Are they liable if someone copies a book or magazine? Or the parent win an unlocked liqueur cabinet, or a homeowner that leaves an ax in an unlocked shed and an insane person starts running around with it chopping peoples heads off?
No, sorry, I don't buy your argument.
By that logic, doesn't a library placing a photocopier out in the open for the public to use just like putting a sign up saying "copy anything you want"?
So just put a README in the folder that says that others are NOT allowed to copy the files without permission from the copyright holder... That should be enough.
Let's be clear...
There is no license. There is only copyright law. A copyright holder may offer a license to BMG to distribute a work, and which you then buy. You own that copy. It's yours. You don't own a license. Copyright law however dictates what you may do with that copy, such as making additional copies and giving them away, but there is no license anywhere in the picture.
And who is the violator? The person you offers the file, or the one that downloads it? The RIAA is claiming the person offering the file is. IMHO they are wrong, much like the library / photocopier / book situation.
If you went and set a stack of CD's on the street that said "take one", no one is going to freak out.
If you had a stack of CD's on your front porch, WELL within your yard, with no such sign, and someone comes up and makes a copy of a CD, are you liable??? That is basically what is happening here.
Just because you have your share open does not mean that you have a "take a copy" sign out...
On the other hand, using a P2P program with all your music on it and available to others IS kind of like putting up a "take a copy" sign. Convincing a judge that you didn't know that your music was available to others may be quite hard to do.
Frankly I find the RIAA's evidence to be dubious. Log files of transactions can be easily faked, much easier and with no sign of alterations. Considering how easy it is to fake such information, how can it possibly be used as evidence? Couldn't I also come up with log files showing that the RIAA's web servers were sharing MP3's with a README that gives me permission? Of course!
Frankly, it's a "he said, she said" situation, and all the RIAA "evidence" should be thrown out as unreliable or hearsay. There is no fingerprint, DNA evidence, photograph, or other such solid evidence at all. This is why emails should not be allowed as evidence. Too easy to fake.
I think I should also point out that one of the reasons that SMTP currently "sucks" is that so few sites abide by the letter and spirit of the RFC's. You have sites with no reverse DNS, sites that have invalid HELO strings, sites that use invalid characters in hostnames, sites that don't wait for responses befor sending the next command, sites that treat permanent errors as temporary, sites that pound on you over and over at a high rate when issued a temporary error, on and on and on. Incompetent mail server programmers and incompetent mail admins are the scourge of the net.
It does make it difficult that in some cases the RFC's are not totally clear, which generally leads to long flamefests on various mailing lists. Some people go by the letter of the RFC's while others try to read in author intent.
The bottom line though is that the RFC's allow you to violate any MUST, SHOULD, MUST NOT, etc. due to "local policy decisions." That allows companies like Hotmail to drop email on the floor with no notification to senders or recipients, companies like Verizon to have insanely short timeouts, etc. Frankly, the big companies are frequently just as bad and sometimes worse than small.
It would be handy to have a SMTP standards tester that mail admins could use to test their systems for basic compliance, and force people to use it (if you are not in the database as having passed, you get rejected.)
That will never fly...
Fine. Only send one autoreply. The problem is that 151,345,599 other people may ALSO use your scheme, which still amounts to a DDOS on the joe-job victim.
The only legitimate way to respond to potential spam is during the initial SMTP transaction with a 4xx or 5xx response codes.
Exim has a feature called "fake reject" where you REALLY accept the mail, but also issue a 5xx error to the sender. In that reject message, you can tell the user what to do. End result is ZERO collateral spam unlike your method. This works fairly well, but there are broken / braindead MTA's out there that don't handle any error after DATA correctly, and even worse are the ones that don't propagate your message back to the client intact.
Technological solutions are hard to do RIGHT due to all the potential pitfalls and horrible standards compliance of MTA's / MUA's.
Hope this helps...
Why not? Or rather... why shouldn't it be? SMTP is a batch "best effort" protocol. Despite the fact that lots of people pretend it's realtime, it's not. You can also request a return-receipt, but the fact is that the far end client doesn't have to honor your request.
If you want a messaging protocol with assured fast delivery, it's not and won't be SMTP due to the design of SMTP.
He should be using !QAZ2wsx@company.com
Try telling a partner / vendor your email address over the phone using something like that. Good luck. Hell, most have trouble with the domain name portion despite spelling it to them...