but in my experience, the more experience you have with 'the real thing' (e.g. martial arts, flight, or firearms) the less satisfying the imitations are. That doesn't mean that DOOM or dogfighters aren't fun anymore, but they're fun for reasons only tangentially related to the activities they model. Doom isn't a 'cop-style' tactical shooting simulator, and most dogfight games are pale echoes of a flight sim
Moving up the scale of involvement, manual combat games (martial arts) totally fail for me because of the controller problem. I find the five button arcade interface insulting and unsatisfying, and I think that a swordfighting game would be similarly hollow without the constraints that make real swordplay challenging.
Fortunately, the hollow plastic lightsaber gives us a great opportunity for tactile feedback and resistance.
Striking an opponent's sword has three major components:
Tactile: the 'thump' of impact on a timescale of 0-40 milliseconds (could be a solenoid in the handle: cheap, easy to install, and minimal software driver needed
Resistance: during an impact, the opponent's sword resists your sword, depending on the force and direction of impact. The force may not be much greater thna the solenoid 'thump', and the timescale is not that much longer (say 100-200 msec), but even brief sustained forces require something far more complex than a single solenois Possible mechanism: independent heavily imbalanced motorized cams on the axis of the saber shaft, and sophisticated drivers to allow the individual cam torque impulses to sum, simultaneously or sequentially, to the desired force profile.
Blade Inertia: throught a fight, the inertia of a blade's motion resists maneuvering. This is a very significant factor in the overall fight. Potential mechanism: Easy way out? Use a heavy saber. Unfortunately, this might tend to wreck your den, your cubicle, and nearby friends. Cheesier way out? "Light saber blades don't have mass, harrumph!"
I think that the irony of Parliament's protest against filtering cannot be emphasized enough, considering that effective Jan 1, 2000, they put their entire nation, public and private, on a mandatory filtering system
According the the Australian EFF, in the area of 'adult images' (one area which the parliament protested filtering). All 'R-rated' content must be subject to age-verification, no 'X-rated' sites are permitted in Australia, and all foreign 'X-rated' sites must be blocked regardless of the age of the viewer.
So basically, 'pornographic content' shouldn't be available to the Parliament (or anyone in Oz) in the first place. Blindness - a fine starting point for future reasoned debate!
A Real-World example of uninformed debate ----------------------------------------- A friend recently returned from Costa Rica and said their War on Drugs is based on a survey that saud a quarter of voters 'felt drugs are a serious concern'. Concern, possibly, but not a problem, according to external public health agencies. Costa Rica has an extremely low drug usage rate -- about 1%.
Unfortunately, only in the past year has there been any real discussion of the facts (some local doctors held a public forum). Until now, 'drugs' were considered a 'dirty' subject that everyone just naturally opposed.
Costa Rica is a wonderful country, with a stable government, low cost of living, good medical care and a large expatriate USAn community - a great place to retire - but it has real infrastructure deficiencies that would benefit from the resources devoted to this misguided policy. I'd hate to be in an ambulance dodging their crater-sized potholes!)
I'm a good tool. I love my gamma Love burst tests, and imaging too I make good maps, with EGRET and COMPTEL And I'm wideband to 30 GeV, too.
It gets lonely at three-twenty miles high There's a spysat here, we never even talk. But I'm a bad sat, 'cuz I only got two gyros I'm a bad sat, ao they're breaking me up
And I'm free... free falling
Down at Goddard, out on the Beltway, Could keep me up 'til my detectors go dark! But all the hackers are standing in the shadows While the suits there, are holding all the cards.
So I'm free, I'm free fallin'
I wanna glide down in the Pacific Don't wanna leave chunks all over the sky Don't wanna free fall down onto someone Don't wanna be a NASA black eye
So I'm free, I'm free fallin'
Yes, I'm Compton. I loved my gamma Read transients, and did imaging too I'm a bad sat, and you won't even miss me I'm a bad sat, and it's breaking my heart
The RADIATE (formerly Aureate) monitoring programs that are packaged with over 400 freeware, shareware and demo programs is a perfect example of a deliberately spread virus (in Win9x)
1) you are not informed that a *separate* program will be installed, in addition to the program you intend to install. This program can monitor your activity even when the program it came with is not in use.
2) the monitor program is not removed when you uninstall the 'carrier' free/shareware program or purchase the paid version of a demo. In fact, there is no way to completely remove it except through an external program like OptOut from Steve Gibson (freeware)
Sounds like a classic, deliberate, and very malicious 'virus'. I'm sure there's something in the license allowing the installation, but nothing about it persisting forever (even after you remove the program the license applies to). True, you could prosecute under the 'unauthorized computer use' felony, but I think the virus law gives a better tool, since the virus+vector model is a familiar one (putting an unannounced virus inside a desired executable doesn't make it less of a virus)
Buy? Why? Let Iridium Die -- a parody sequel
on
Iridium Saved?
·
· Score: 5
Long, long time ago I can still remember how their tech plan made me wince And I knew if I had their cash That I could buy the monster stash It'd take to grasp all that's happened since.
But Motorola made me shiver With every mission they delivered Satellites in orbit, I couldn't take one more bit. I couldn't look, afraid I'd find Wall Street had lost its bloody mind. Something so awkwardly designed... I knew Iridium'd die.
But now it's: "Buy! Buy! The Iridium pie!" With just millions we'll get billions, though it's pie in the sky The good ideas must've all gone dry So the VC's and the bankers all buy So the VC's and the bankers all buy
Do they know the specs we love? Or do they have faith in stuff above 'Cuz the tech just say it's true? Oh what a splendid fit they'd throw, if they understood L.E.O. And how the orbit's bound to crash real soon.
Do they know the facts and take a stand? Or is it just an Accounting scam? Another tax write-off? A business 'loss' (*cough cough*)
I'm just an aging hardware hack, with a calculator, and not smoking crack So they had me rolling on my back The day they shouted "Buy!"
And they were singing: "Buy? Why? Let Iridium die!" Why spend millions to get billions of just pie in the sky? The good ideas must've all gone dry So the VC's and the bankers all buy So the VC's and the bankers all buy
Well for ten years they've been slick And the business plan that made me sick Is not what it's supposed to be. When investors sang in the court of law In a place where truth brings on awe In a voice that sounds like Craig McCaw.
Debating "Should we just bring them down?" (Scam websites sprouting all around) The verdict was returned: The system soon would burn! And when Slashdot had a thread on use, the clueless all were running loose (Even trolls aren't that obtuse!) "Don't let Iridium die!"
And I'm still singing: "Buy? Why? Let Iridium die!" Why spend millions to get billions that's just pie in the sky? The good ideas must've all gone dry So the VC's and the bankers all buy So the VC's and the bankers all buy
Helter Skelter in the summer swelter. The VC's offer last second shelter, Fifty Mill and running costs Until the plan is finally passed, by a judge who must be smoking grass What the heck, it's not like it's *his* cash
For months, we had sweet surcease From addled threads and press release Now I just want to cry. This network just won't die!
Then Katz posts "can't you all see..." (the tempers fly, as usually) He compared it all to MP3... the way Iridium died.
We kept on screaming: "Buy! Buy! The Iridium pie!" Spend just millions to get billions though it's pie in the sky! The good ideas must've all gone dry So the VC's and the bankers all buy So the VC's and the bankers all buy
Now don't get me wrong, I love space It's a sanctified holy place But here's our chance to start again So let's get real, let's get smart. Iridium soon will fall apart And funding is this devil's only friend
So let's just watch the rockets flare, the satellites plunge through the air. While there still is time (and rebuild it, right this time!) As the flames all fall from the sky, let's clap until we think we'll cry Let's let Iridium die!
We should be singing: "Buy? Why? Let Iridium die!" Why spend millions to get billions that's just pie in the sky? The good ideas must've all gone dry So the VC's and the bankers all buy So the VC's and the bankers all buy
I met a man who had a clue, and asked him what else we could do But he just smiled and turned away. I want to go up five hundred, miles, where I'd kept my tech dreams as a child, But the man there said manned payloads wouldn't pay. In the halls the techies sighed, the coders laughed, and the testers cried, Not a word was spoken, the promises all were broken. Like the other dreams they shot to hell, like anti-grav and FTL and condos stationed at 5-L, But they fund Iridium... why?
'Cuz they're still singing "Buy! Buy! The Iridium pie!" Spent just millions to get billions but it's pie in the sky The good ideas must've all gone dry So the VC's and the bankers all buy So the VC's and the bankers all buy
Tech Info on Iridium's on-board ATM
on
Iridium Saved?
·
· Score: 2
There have been a lot of questions about the On-Board Processing available on Iridium. This article offers some information about Iridium's on-board Motorola hardware, compared to other systems, and discusses the networking structure (ground and orbital)
There's more info and actual data in an article called Supporting ATM on a Low-Earth Orbit Sattelite System covering the ATM switching network in iridium, including goodies like signal strengths in various ground settings and conditions, traffic capacities, and RF restrictions internationally.
Is the DoD still on board? Could be the key!
on
Iridium Saved?
·
· Score: 3
In April 1999, the Defense Department signed a $219M contract with Iridium for service, equipment, etc. I don't know thye exact terms (duration, etc.) but it had to be at least a year, and couldn't take effect much before June 1999. [Here's a link]
The DoD was involved from the beginning, sitting in on the design and planning for the network, and reportedly constructing a $100M DoD-only ground station.
If they stay on board, than the numbers for this new iridium venture could change. In the short term, the DoD money alone (assuming it was sensibly structures as monthly payments) could cover maintanance, taking much of the strain off the business plan, and allowing otherwise impractical applications to be profitable.
Doing some actual research
on
Iridium Saved?
·
· Score: 5
I applaud all those creative technical minds trying to come up with interesting and useful applications for this networks, but without hard info, we're just pissing in the wind and blowing hot air.
Why is no one addressing the other major elements of the Microsoft proposal?
1. the insistance on having this classified as a divestiture, instead of a reorganization (and the attendant legal benefits) (see below)
2. The fact that Microsoft is an international entity -- and could easily remain monolithic abroad, with only the US units being separate (and unified control manifesting to an overseas unit!) 3. That under such an arrangement, American law would be of limited effect. (If you thought MS had clout with the US govt etc., imagine the consideration it might get from a small 'unfriendly' nation.
4) That its overseas units can only participate in the divestiture *in accordance with local laws* -- which can prevent the final overall divestiture indefinitely, certainly for many years (I think CitiGroup tried this trick a few years ago)
In fact, as I go down this document, I see more pitfalls and minefields than tha Maginot line and the former BDR/DDR (E/W German) border combined. And IANAL
Surely others are interested in the substantitive issues that will affect the Real World break-up far more than our (largely unheard) M$ bashing
The nexy step will be to add haptic tactile elements (tactile output or feedback - like a soundcard for touch). Don't bother debating the user interface benefits, we all know what it will really be used for.
[And if you think *anything* could convince me to make a housecall to service a computer after this comes out, you're crazy. I'm never touching someone else's computer again!]
Crashing it is not the worst they can do. They can deliberately bury and misinterpret their own data.
I've never said this before, but please consider modding this up so it make it to 'hot links'. This thread is getting 'old', and few will see this information otherwise
I wish I'd seen this article before, because it seems that *everyone has forgotten the truth about the Viking I and II findings regarding the life on Mars experiments:
In short strokes: Most of the tests were positive as NASA fully admits (but sometimes buries) several researchers associated with the experiments have reported the horror at NASA when the results came in -- "We can't publish this! We'll look like fools." Please remember this was a billion dollar mission planned at a time (70's) when a billion dollars was a lot mpore money than it is today, andthat these experiments were widely peer-reviewed around the world, and considered solid until they yielded positive results
I wish I could provide you with links to why the individual results were disqualified, but the NASA website containing most of my old links is gone or merged. (It shouldn't take more than 10-15 of poking around to find new ones, but if I don't post this comment fast, it will die unseen.) However, here's what Jame s E. Tillman , who was on the Viking Meteorology Science Team and was Director of the Viking Computer Facility (at the University of Washington in Seattle) said at a national Prime Computer Users Group meeting in Orlando FL, 1984:
"As to specific results, the consensus is that no evidence for life was found even though the biology experiments reacted in a strongly positive way. The reason for the reaction is that the Martian soils contain compounds that liberate oxygen in the presence of water."
"The soils will liberate oxygen"? What is the justification for this assumption. None, except for post-facto guesswork. In fact, you'll find the specific chemistry cited to 'dismiss' the experiments is inconsitent with more moderns estimates of Martian soil composition and surface dynamics. Further each of the three positive experiments (deliberately designed to complement one another and prevent error) is dismissed for a very different reason.
Finally, I think that the 'atypical' kinetics that was used to discredit one experiment (positive results as a little water was added, but later tailing off) is *exactly* what we should have expected. Water may be a limiting factor for life on mars (or it may not) but after tens of millions of years, we should expect that microscopic life in a dry part of the surface would find water toxic in excess anounts. Hence - early rapid positive results, followed by a die off.
It is also possible that there are other limiting factors to growth, so the microbes reponded positively until they hit 'the wall' on another substance... like stored short term high energy compound (e.g. ATP in earth life) or even food (quick energy foods like sugars)
I urge you to go to NASA's websites and read for yourself. This is no great 'cover-up' the info is all there for you to consider. The 'embarrassing parts' are harder to find (broken links, disappearing archives, etc,) but they are not conscientiously buried.
Meaning that... pgp5i will eat out of/dev/random when it is used non-interactive. In linux, with entropy based random (take time between irq requests into a 'pool', then feed into randomness generator as seeds) it is just fine. Its the other unicies that are broke, not pgp5i.
I have no idea where you got that from. It sounds like you don't either. Check out this alert in CompuWorld:
The flaw was discovered in the PGP 5.0 code base and is specific to Linux and OpenBSD command-line versions... Versions 2.x and 6.5 of PGP aren't affected and nor are PGP versions ported to other platforms.
I'd rather build a 19" rack... but gee, how to do it for cheap???
I've done this. Admittedly, "cheap" is relative to the price of buying a factory made, but it wasn't that hard, and the thing is incredibly sturdy
1) The box frame is made from 1.5-2" construction angle iron. I got mine surplus, but I've seen 6-10 foot lengths from a HQ/Home Depot for $10-20. Use perforated angle iron for the two vertical corners in front. It doesn't have the same hole spacing as a 'real' rack, but that hasn't been a problem yet!
2) Half a dozen carbide masonry bits makes for a cheap way to cut the 1/2" holes I used for bolts
3) to assure squareness, structural rigidity, and a aesthetic side, I cut plywood panels slightly smaller (by the thickness of the angle iron) than the final desired dimensions. I bolted these inside the frame as templates to hold everything together as I drilled and bolted. A cheap sheet of 4ftx8ft BC grade plywood is about $11-15
4) Then I removed the panels, sheathed them in aluminum roof flashing (a single $8 roll was plenty for the whole project) It was like wrapping a huge flat present - aluminum sheet is easy to work with. Then I bolted the sheathed side and bottom panels back onto the frame as EMI/RFI shielding and structural reinforcement.
5) I used aluminum angle iron for the rack slides. I could've used steel, but I was impatient, and aluminum is much easier to cut/drill
At this point I could have stopped, painted and been done, but I decided to make this way cool.
A) I removed the panels, welded the corners (which had been bolted) and replaced the panels. It was my first real welding project, but it went pretty well. My grandkids will be able to use it in 2030.
B) I painted the frame black, and I plan on laminating some jade green marble formica veneer onto the side panels. A jade marble tower with black steel corners will outclass any commercial rack (from past experience, I know to keep a black permanent marker handy for touch-up)
I took (old-fashioned film) photos as I worked, and someday I'll get them developed, scanned and posted on the web. If I can sort them out from the 20+ other rolls of undeveloped film I have lying around (I have a darkroom I haven't used in years, but it's hard to force myself to send film *out* to be developed)
The whole project took me a week (of spare time) but it was a real hands-on rush. I'd do it again! (well, maybe... ) _____________
On the other hand, I think he failed to convey the full impact of something I found very compelling. We might very well *not* have demanded increased Article 56 burden, if we'd been at the hearings.
Right now we're looking at pro-corporate examples that make out blood boil one way, but there *is* another side, even for an ardent anti-corporatist. [Let's forget for the moment that half of SlashDot is rabidly anti-IP right now. We *have* a patent system. Let's work with that] How many of us have tinkered and invented since we were kids, and at some point considered having an inventions produced and marketed? What's the first thing you worry about? The system and being ripped off by the Big Guys. Result: no one wins. The product doesn't get made -- or gets made years later, when someone else comes up with it (and probably *that* person gets ripped off.
Most of us have wished it wasn't so difficult to get a patent. The more inventive you are, the more likely you've wished it. A lot of us would love to be able to support ourselves with our explorations of the possible... so that we could spend our lives inventing more.
But we're 'little guys'. The cost, the search, lawyers, the years to approval -- all are scary!
On the other hand, it realy burns our beans to see someone else patent something that seems 'obvious' (to us) -- often *so* obvious that it seems like the major cleverness lay in imagining the idea of patenting it. Then we start demanding more rigorous standards for patenting.
So which will it be? Easier patents or harder? I choose "easier". Why? because a corporation can more readily carry the burden of increased Artcle 56 demands than 'the little guy', the Yankee tinkerer, the one-man R+D shop. And that seems to be Dickinson's view, too. What we need is easier, more consistent, transparent and less painful patent review. Unfortunately, he simply isn't equipped to perform that review. he wants our help (on his terms, of course - whaddya expect?)
In the extreme, the patent system could be like the internet -- anyone can put up a site (stake a claim), but that claim can be shot down too. That isn't the no utopian vision it might seem. The Internet has plenty of problems that we wrestle with daily: spam, threatigation (coercion by threat of litigation -- just made it up), cybersquatters... you all know the list.
But since patents aren't hobbled by free speech concerns, which *need* to be generously oversized, due to the power differential between individuals and coercive groups (private or government), there is a reasonable opportunity to construct a system where scientific and enginneering principles reign and not 'legal principles' (oxymoron).
We don't have to have a 'wild west', we can have a collaborative 'open source patent review'
Admittedly, a lot of people (including many lawyers I know) would find purely technical grounds to be too "cold" or "restrictive". They prefer softer standards, like 'social values' or consensus, or even fantasy. That's not a slap -- we're all sometimes a little less rational that we'd like to believe. My point is: not everyone will agree with *any* patent, when it keeps them from doing what *they* want. We all secretly hate the guy who gets 'our' girl, 'our' parking place or 'our' lottery jackpot.
We'll all sometimes want to decide patents on the basis of what we imagine the consequences would be, rather than whether it is a genuine advance over prior art. We will find the battle for to make rational patent decisions is not, and may never be, as easy as we should.
My 2 cents. Harder or easier? I say easier -- both to create patents and to contest them. _____________
Good lord, I'm really getting tired of this! If you guys can't read and remember your own front page (as you've admitted you don't) then it means that you (as individuals) aren't picking topics that you (as a group) find essential reading -- and that's a terrible sign!
There's so much interesting stuff going on, but they seem to find the same old stories over and over, perhaps 1/3 of the accepted stories are retreads. CmdrTaco et al -- we love you, but maybe it's time to go to a community moderated article selection with occassional "automatically accepted" posts by you guys.
if you can't remember or even do a search on old topics when picking a new one, you are too overloaded to be doing a good job at the task of selecting topics.
There are so many other areas where we'd rather have you guys using your impressive talents!
At the very least, can we see a quarterly thread to select the "best-of" suggestions for improving SlashDot, the way we select questions for interviews? Call it a step towards RMS's view of community-based Open source, if you will, but repeats and other bad thread decisions serve no one, and I like/. too much to let it drift off course without saying something. _____________
"Back in the early 1980's when the personal computer world was coming into being, the kids running about with their wareZ BBS systems were using the term "Pirate" to describe themselves."
True, wAreZ DoodZ called themselves 'pirates', but most of us are not accustomed to taking them as experts in usage -- or much of anything. Next you'll start spelling like them...
Warez doods also consider themselves "elite" -- I suppose you agree, since you cite them as authorities. Many of them say they're studs, too. Need I go on? "Pirates" was a ill-informed usage, based on an ignorance about true piracy, and a romantization of their own actions. And make no mistake, they *did* romanticize the pirate image!
Your use of 'pirate' may be fine on a warez BBS or casual conversation. In a court, or a reasoned debate, it is inflammatory.
Besides, the term is accurate. A Pirate is one who preys on others, and takes their work and claims the profit.
"Accurate"? At best, it's an analogy -- a poor one. Note that you *made up* the definition you supplied. You didn't even make a feeble attempt at accuracy. I doubt a pirate would copy your possessions and let you retain them.
"Preys on"? Boy, your momma really protected you well, if you've never seen a real victim. Illegal copying is not even in the same category as rape, murder, torture, pillage etc. Those are typical pirate acts. [Apparently, you did not understand what I said about the misuse of words such as 'murder' in my original post]
I think you are simply insensitive to the real meaning of piracy. They do still exist, and they still kill or take their victims hostage, as always. They are generally not just cargo thieves -- the helplessness of their victims on the high seas seems to bring out the worst in them. Piracy is a capital offence in most jurisdictions that allow capital offences. In some nations, the only two capital offenses are piracy and treason.
Ny two bit shoplifter who grabs a CD does worse than the criminal (and I'll grant you that part) who copies a CD, because they have taken it 100%. If my ex steals my CD, I no longer have it. *I* cannot use it. All three people are committing criminal acts, the one you call 'pirate' is actually doing the least damage *per act*
I concede that the *aggregate* effects are huge, but that does not justify the use of such strong term for the individual act. Nor does it justify trivializing the horror of true piracy. [again, see what I said about 'fur is murder']
The act of diminishing the value of a thing is not theft. Theft involves the loss of a thing.
REDUCING THE VALUE OF A THING (is less than) THEFT OF A THING (is much less than) PIRACY
If I don't keep my yard up property, I may reduce my neighbor's property values. This is not as bad as taking my neighbors property from them (theft) and not nearly as bad as capturing their houses, holding them hostage, stealing all their possessions, and possibly raping and killing them.
Accurate? HAH!
Unlawful copying is a civil wrong-doing, a violation of copyright. In a few specific situations, it may be a criminal act, but it is not theft, just as it is not "illegal dumping of toxic wastes" Under no circumstances is it "piracy"
There are many situations where common usage is different from legal usage and the usage of informed discussion. "Assault" in common usage, means an attack. In the law and informed debate, it means a threat of violence (and possibly an attempt) Hence: "Assault and battery" where battery is the actual attack.
You do a disservice to the overall debate if you cloud the terms by calling 'copying' piracy. _____________
Most people seem to throw the word 'piracy' around as if it were just a cartoon concept: the buccaneer with eye patch, peg-leg, parrot, etc. flying a skull-and-bones
By doing this, they are revealing their own ignorance. True piracy exists on the high seas today and is one of the most serious offenses an individual can commit under international law. There have been several cases around the world where individuals have successfully sued for being libel or defamation after being called 'pirates' inappropriately (for software theft and other actions)
The term 'pirate' for software theft *was* used precisely to place the alleged activities in a more negative light in several early lawsuits. I recall discussion of this in some of the hobbyist periodicals of the early 80's like SoftTalk (perhaps when it was called "Apple something")
It is no more legitimate than calling someone who wears fur a "murderer" - 'murder' means killing a human being (or, in some jurisdictions, causing to be killed, or being involved in a criminal conspiracy resulting in death) Fur isn't murder. Eating prime rib isn't murder. stepping on an ant isn't murder. Annoying Greenpeace isn't murder.
Some additional info: DuPlessis v. DeKlerk (South Africa) defamation suit against a broadcaster for using the term 'pirate', among other things
There was a case in the 80's in Australia, where a company that was successfully sued for illegal use and sale of commercial software (after ceasing to pay license fees), later turned around and successfully sued for the plaintiffs public use of the term 'pirate'. Unfortunately, i could not find a link for this _____________
No wonder its itching for eyeballs. Their site is not available at http://www.alphanews.net as the Slashdot article stated. I presume that they advertise that URL, but their second level domain nameserver doesn't seem to resolve it yet. But a simple http://alphanews.net works just fine.
----------------- Jes' doin' what I can to encourage people to read the links before commenting on them... _____________
Let's say that we want to find a street corner is Seattle, do we have to wait an extra two minutes while it downloads an animated banner at 9600 bps?
Hey, if you want a nightmare scenario:
May 27, 2002; Monday
Hey Bill!
Late for work again. The traffic lights were jammed.
I'm beginning to agree with your post on Slashdot: let's hire sacrificial hacker felons to take down the WorldWide Advertising Net!
I can usually tolerate the extra ten seconds per intersection as the electronic billboards optimize themselves for the viewing audience, but at rush hour, there's just not enough bandwidth, and the billboard delays throw the entire traffic system out of sync.
We should never have let Time-Warner subsidize our traffic lights. (Good thing my boss never knows when I'm late. His wife made him move to a fancy suburb -- they have Microslack, poor bastards. Now his commute is total obstacle course. They even rig cars to crash for the rubberneck factor. MS doesn't even pretend their crashes are accidental anymore)
Speaking of Microslack crashes, that's why I was late. The Advertising Networks servers went down. I was stuck staring at those damn 'sponsored' BSOD's for over an hour.
(BTW, I have to find a commuter route with a more compatible demographic -- if I have to see another Viagra ad, I'm getting a gun and doing some natural selection on those Viagra delivery boys on their little blue bikes and blue tights. I don't care if impulse purchases are up, I'm sick of them banging on my window. I mean do I *look* like I have that kind of problem? Heck no! I told them it was a one-time thing, because my wife was curious, but do they take me off their database? No! Instead they put my wife in. Man, when she found out I let that datum slip, I didn't need Viagra for a week -- because I was sleeping on the couch.)
Well, I gotta sign off. The phone's ringing. God, I Miss the days when I didn't have to answer! But half the office has that GPS Callee ID now, so they know damn well I'm sitting right here.
The Platypus comes in 3 flavors: The QikCACHE without an external power supply The QikDRIVE with an external power supply, and the QikDATA that has 'the added protection of automated back-up of data to an independent hard disk drive in the event of complete power loss.'
And how pray tell, does the *independent hard drive* function in the event of a complete power loss?
The QikCache is 'card only' - when you turn the computer off, it gets wiped. But that's irrelevant, since the thread is specifically about the QikDrive.
The QikDrive is 'card plus external power supply' that allows you to turn your computer off (e.g. to make hardware changes) without wiping your data. It still isn't non volatile (it wipes if the power is cut) and it costs $9840.00 for 8GB. Quantum's pricelist is down right now, but I read it was $500-600 per GB or less than half the price of the QikDrive
The QikData has "mirroring capacity" and the "capability" to transfer to a Platypus HDD with a built-in UPS. This increases the price even more -- the HDD/UPS unit is extra. You also have to load the HDD back to the QikData before you can restore service. Not good.
A nonvolatile Quantum, on the other hand is not dependent on the power. Yank the cord, pull the Quantum, take it cross country, plug it in, just like a HDD. And you have instant high-speed access
So, while I have no strong feeling about either device, I'm hard pressed to see how you give the advantage to Platypus at all, much less $8K worth! No, I'm not being sarcastic. I really am curious why you gave the QikData the advantage. At all.
The Quantum is faster in "transactions/sec" (who cares about 'peak bandwidth'?), cheaper. And can be nonvolatile, straight out of the box without extra wires and components. (You can come crying to us when a technician seeing that the server is powered down feels free to unplug the QikData power cable. A UPS doesn't help, if you're not connected to it!) _____________
Well yah, but.... (makes sweeping Spinal Tap gesture) This one goes to eleven!
Seriously, though, there are differences. The Quantum Rushmore Ultra was a 3.5" SCSI drive, with 30MB/s transfer while the Platypus QuickDrive is a PCI card with 110MB/sec transfer. I can see how emmett though this was a noteworthy advance.
However, the Quantum had a 2 GB nonvolatile option (vs 3.2 GB volatile). The Platypus is up to 8GB but volatile only. Advantage Quantum, AFAIAC
And strangely despite the Platypus' much faster throughput, they cite 15K transactions per second, while Quantim cites 18K transactions per second. I don't know what the deal is there, but it's hard to consider this in platypus' favor. Platypus knew the specs of their existing competition, if they cite a lower transaction figure, there may be a hidden reason. (or maybe Quantum was optimistic)
BTW, I checked Quantum's 'success stories' to see who was using the Rushmore Ultra RAMdrive and how/why. They had *exactly one* success story for the RAMdrive (vs. the Rushmore HDD accelerator) and that company (iPrint) states on the first page that they didn't investigate any alternatives. _____________
Before anyone gets carried away, please remember that these are volatile RAM drives.
The Platypus overcomes the HDD's primary liability (read/write latency) at a serious cost to the HDDs primary function: reliable storage. Note that it doesn't even have an on-board battery. It simply has a separate external Power supply and (optional) UPS
While a UPS is wonderful for keeping my system running, it's much less reliable than it needs to be if an outage (or office idiot kicking the plug out) means I lose *all* my data (sales for the day, etc.) In a sense, the platypus drive is not much stabler than having 8GB of system RAM and *no* HDD ["not much" is relative. The MTBF of a UPS is orders of magnitude less than a good HDD)
I doubt the usual high reliability filesystems could maintain a RAID/HA type redundant backup to disk precisely because the RAM HD is so much faster than the disk. It would be like having a scribe backing up your HD to quill-and-scroll -- the more you utilize the tremendous speed of the RAM HD, the farther behind the disk will fall (and thrash).
It's a nice product (though hardly a new idea), but I see it having limited application (e.g. as a HD accelerator in some server applications)
Perhaps someone can do a hardware workaround using an intermediate NVRAM between the SDRAM HD and the hard disk, using principles borrowed from both cache technology and High reliability file systems. But it'll take a bit of work.
Is there already a solution out there? Or is this essentially just a giant unidirectional HDD cache, good for serving up data faster than an HDD, but not good for critical rewritten data? _____________
Sometimes I notice bugs that do not seem to be in the Slashcode per se, but seem to be affecting Slashdot alone. Often these are not consistent ongoing bugs, but transient, lasting 1-3 days.
One example: one weekend, my BBC Science slashbox was filled with VA/Linux corporate links instead of articles. The problem was reproducible (on my account at least) from different machines.
I realize this may be due to changes and updating (both software and hardware), but I am of the opinion that 'bugs don'f fix themselves'. I have reported a few to slashcode, but clearly this was some sort of config error at/.
Also, it took me quite a bit of searching before I was moderately confident that Slashcode was the place to go. This should be in the FAQ, or better, be a separate entry in the upper left corner, along with FAQ, privacy, submit story, etc.
Slashdot: every responsible site needs a good site specific bug reporting mechanism! How would you feel about *any* company that linked you to the BBS software manufacturer, under the presumption that the underlying code may be flawed but their own site implementation and administration was perfect?
No one knows better that/.'ers how important bug reporting is. Why do we have to hunt for that link? It needs to be prominent, in several places around the site, including the 'front page' _____________
Slashdot Mirror
This is certainly a promising step...
but in my experience, the more experience you have with 'the real thing' (e.g. martial arts, flight, or firearms) the less satisfying the imitations are. That doesn't mean that DOOM or dogfighters aren't fun anymore, but they're fun for reasons only tangentially related to the activities they model. Doom isn't a 'cop-style' tactical shooting simulator, and most dogfight games are pale echoes of a flight sim
Moving up the scale of involvement, manual combat games (martial arts) totally fail for me because of the controller problem. I find the five button arcade interface insulting and unsatisfying, and I think that a swordfighting game would be similarly hollow without the constraints that make real swordplay challenging.
Fortunately, the hollow plastic lightsaber gives us a great opportunity for tactile feedback and resistance.
Striking an opponent's sword has three major components:
Tactile: the 'thump' of impact on a timescale of 0-40 milliseconds
(could be a solenoid in the handle: cheap, easy to install, and minimal software driver needed
Resistance: during an impact, the opponent's sword resists your sword, depending on the force and direction of impact. The force may not be much greater thna the solenoid 'thump', and the timescale is not that much longer (say 100-200 msec), but even brief sustained forces require something far more complex than a single solenois
Possible mechanism: independent heavily imbalanced motorized cams on the axis of the saber shaft, and sophisticated drivers to allow the individual cam torque impulses to sum, simultaneously or sequentially, to the desired force profile.
Blade Inertia: throught a fight, the inertia of a blade's motion resists maneuvering. This is a very significant factor in the overall fight.
Potential mechanism: Easy way out? Use a heavy saber. Unfortunately, this might tend to wreck your den, your cubicle, and nearby friends. Cheesier way out? "Light saber blades don't have mass, harrumph!"
I think that the irony of Parliament's protest against filtering cannot be emphasized enough, considering that effective Jan 1, 2000, they put their entire nation, public and private, on a mandatory filtering system
According the the Australian EFF, in the area of 'adult images' (one area which the parliament protested filtering). All 'R-rated' content must be subject to age-verification, no 'X-rated' sites are permitted in Australia, and all foreign 'X-rated' sites must be blocked regardless of the age of the viewer.
So basically, 'pornographic content' shouldn't be available to the Parliament (or anyone in Oz) in the first place. Blindness - a fine starting point for future reasoned debate!
A Real-World example of uninformed debate
-----------------------------------------
A friend recently returned from Costa Rica and said their War on Drugs is based on a survey that saud a quarter of voters 'felt drugs are a serious concern'. Concern, possibly, but not a problem, according to external public health agencies. Costa Rica has an extremely low drug usage rate -- about 1%.
Unfortunately, only in the past year has there been any real discussion of the facts (some local doctors held a public forum). Until now, 'drugs' were considered a 'dirty' subject that everyone just naturally opposed.
Costa Rica is a wonderful country, with a stable government, low cost of living, good medical care and a large expatriate USAn community - a great place to retire - but it has real infrastructure deficiencies that would benefit from the resources devoted to this misguided policy. I'd hate to be in an ambulance dodging their crater-sized potholes!)
(apologies to Tom Petty)
... free falling
I'm a good tool. I love my gamma
Love burst tests, and imaging too
I make good maps, with EGRET and COMPTEL
And I'm wideband to 30 GeV, too.
It gets lonely at three-twenty miles high
There's a spysat here, we never even talk.
But I'm a bad sat, 'cuz I only got two gyros
I'm a bad sat, ao they're breaking me up
And I'm free
Down at Goddard, out on the Beltway,
Could keep me up 'til my detectors go dark!
But all the hackers are standing in the shadows
While the suits there, are holding all the cards.
So I'm free, I'm free fallin'
I wanna glide down in the Pacific
Don't wanna leave chunks all over the sky
Don't wanna free fall down onto someone
Don't wanna be a NASA black eye
So I'm free, I'm free fallin'
Yes, I'm Compton. I loved my gamma
Read transients, and did imaging too
I'm a bad sat, and you won't even miss me
I'm a bad sat, and it's breaking my heart
So I'm free, I'm free fallin'
Refreshing and sweet
Your haiku soothes my mind like
Sherbet in summer
The RADIATE (formerly Aureate) monitoring programs that are packaged with over 400 freeware, shareware and demo programs is a perfect example of a deliberately spread virus (in Win9x)
1) you are not informed that a *separate* program will be installed, in addition to the program you intend to install. This program can monitor your activity even when the program it came with is not in use.
2) the monitor program is not removed when you uninstall the 'carrier' free/shareware program or purchase the paid version of a demo. In fact, there is no way to completely remove it except through an external program like OptOut from Steve Gibson (freeware)
Sounds like a classic, deliberate, and very malicious 'virus'. I'm sure there's something in the license allowing the installation, but nothing about it persisting forever (even after you remove the program the license applies to). True, you could prosecute under the 'unauthorized computer use' felony, but I think the virus law gives a better tool, since the virus+vector model is a familiar one (putting an unannounced virus inside a desired executable doesn't make it less of a virus)
Buy? Why? Let Iridium Die
(sequel to "Bye, Bye, Miss Iridium Pie")
Long, long time ago I can still remember how their tech plan made me wince
And I knew if I had their cash
That I could buy the monster stash
It'd take to grasp all that's happened since.
But Motorola made me shiver
With every mission they delivered
Satellites in orbit,
I couldn't take one more bit.
I couldn't look, afraid I'd find
Wall Street had lost its bloody mind.
Something so awkwardly designed... I knew Iridium'd die.
But now it's:
"Buy! Buy! The Iridium pie!"
With just millions we'll get billions, though it's pie in the sky
The good ideas must've all gone dry
So the VC's and the bankers all buy
So the VC's and the bankers all buy
Do they know the specs we love?
Or do they have faith in stuff above
'Cuz the tech just say it's true?
Oh what a splendid fit they'd throw,
if they understood L.E.O.
And how the orbit's bound to crash real soon.
Do they know the facts and take a stand?
Or is it just an Accounting scam?
Another tax write-off?
A business 'loss' (*cough cough*)
I'm just an aging hardware hack,
with a calculator, and not smoking crack
So they had me rolling on my back
The day they shouted "Buy!"
And they were singing:
"Buy? Why? Let Iridium die!"
Why spend millions to get billions of just pie in the sky?
The good ideas must've all gone dry
So the VC's and the bankers all buy
So the VC's and the bankers all buy
Well for ten years they've been slick
And the business plan that made me sick
Is not what it's supposed to be.
When investors sang in the court of law
In a place where truth brings on awe
In a voice that sounds like Craig McCaw.
Debating "Should we just bring them down?"
(Scam websites sprouting all around)
The verdict was returned:
The system soon would burn!
And when Slashdot had a thread on use,
the clueless all were running loose
(Even trolls aren't that obtuse!)
"Don't let Iridium die!"
And I'm still singing:
"Buy? Why? Let Iridium die!"
Why spend millions to get billions that's just pie in the sky?
The good ideas must've all gone dry
So the VC's and the bankers all buy
So the VC's and the bankers all buy
Helter Skelter in the summer swelter.
The VC's offer last second shelter,
Fifty Mill and running costs
Until the plan is finally passed,
by a judge who must be smoking grass
What the heck, it's not like it's *his* cash
For months, we had sweet surcease
From addled threads and press release
Now I just want to cry.
This network just won't die!
Then Katz posts "can't you all see..."
(the tempers fly, as usually)
He compared it all to MP3... the way Iridium died.
We kept on screaming:
"Buy! Buy! The Iridium pie!"
Spend just millions to get billions though it's pie in the sky!
The good ideas must've all gone dry
So the VC's and the bankers all buy
So the VC's and the bankers all buy
Now don't get me wrong, I love space
It's a sanctified holy place
But here's our chance to start again
So let's get real, let's get smart.
Iridium soon will fall apart
And funding is this devil's only friend
So let's just watch the rockets flare,
the satellites plunge through the air.
While there still is time
(and rebuild it, right this time!)
As the flames all fall from the sky,
let's clap until we think we'll cry
Let's let Iridium die!
We should be singing:
"Buy? Why? Let Iridium die!"
Why spend millions to get billions that's just pie in the sky?
The good ideas must've all gone dry
So the VC's and the bankers all buy
So the VC's and the bankers all buy
I met a man who had a clue, and asked him what else we could do
But he just smiled and turned away.
I want to go up five hundred, miles, where I'd kept my tech dreams as a child,
But the man there said manned payloads wouldn't pay.
In the halls the techies sighed, the coders laughed, and the testers cried,
Not a word was spoken, the promises all were broken.
Like the other dreams they shot to hell, like anti-grav and FTL
and condos stationed at 5-L,
But they fund Iridium... why?
'Cuz they're still singing
"Buy! Buy! The Iridium pie!"
Spent just millions to get billions but it's pie in the sky
The good ideas must've all gone dry
So the VC's and the bankers all buy
So the VC's and the bankers all buy
There have been a lot of questions about the On-Board Processing available on Iridium. This article offers some information about Iridium's on-board Motorola hardware, compared to other systems, and discusses the networking structure (ground and orbital)
There's more info and actual data in an article called Supporting ATM on a Low-Earth Orbit Sattelite System covering the ATM switching network in iridium, including goodies like signal strengths in various ground settings and conditions, traffic capacities, and RF restrictions internationally.
In April 1999, the Defense Department signed a $219M contract with Iridium for service, equipment, etc. I don't know thye exact terms (duration, etc.) but it had to be at least a year, and couldn't take effect much before June 1999. [Here's a link]
The DoD was involved from the beginning, sitting in on the design and planning for the network, and reportedly constructing a $100M DoD-only ground station.
If they stay on board, than the numbers for this new iridium venture could change. In the short term, the DoD money alone (assuming it was sensibly structures as monthly payments) could cover maintanance, taking much of the strain off the business plan, and allowing otherwise impractical applications to be profitable.
I applaud all those creative technical minds trying to come up with interesting and useful applications for this networks, but without hard info, we're just pissing in the wind and blowing hot air.
There's a fairly recent and detailed IEEE report on the Iridium network
Here's a chart of competing systems that are up, or will be up soon
Here's a fairly complete description of several current satellite telephone systems with info on frequency allocations, ground stations, and other important network details [has a chapter on iridium]
Here's a article in Test System News testing Iridium handsets and network for real world performance
More to come....
Why is no one addressing the other major elements of the Microsoft proposal?
1. the insistance on having this classified as a divestiture, instead of a reorganization (and the attendant legal benefits) (see below)
2. The fact that Microsoft is an international entity -- and could easily remain monolithic abroad, with only the US units being separate (and unified control manifesting to an overseas unit!)
3. That under such an arrangement, American law would be of limited effect. (If you thought MS had clout with the US govt etc., imagine the consideration it might get from a small 'unfriendly' nation.
4) That its overseas units can only participate in the divestiture *in accordance with local laws* -- which can prevent the final overall divestiture indefinitely, certainly for many years (I think CitiGroup tried this trick a few years ago)
In fact, as I go down this document, I see more pitfalls and minefields than tha Maginot line and the former BDR/DDR (E/W German) border combined. And IANAL
Surely others are interested in the substantitive issues that will affect the Real World break-up far more than our (largely unheard) M$ bashing
My apologies.. but someone has to say this:
The nexy step will be to add haptic tactile elements (tactile output or feedback - like a soundcard for touch). Don't bother debating the user interface benefits, we all know what it will really be used for.
[And if you think *anything* could convince me to make a housecall to service a computer after this comes out, you're crazy. I'm never touching someone else's computer again!]
I've never said this before, but please consider modding this up so it make it to 'hot links'. This thread is getting 'old', and few will see this information otherwise
I wish I'd seen this article before, because it seems that *everyone has forgotten the truth about the Viking I and II findings regarding the life on Mars experiments:
In short strokes: Most of the tests were positive as NASA fully admits (but sometimes buries) several researchers associated with the experiments have reported the horror at NASA when the results came in -- "We can't publish this! We'll look like fools." Please remember this was a billion dollar mission planned at a time (70's) when a billion dollars was a lot mpore money than it is today, andthat these experiments were widely peer-reviewed around the world, and considered solid until they yielded positive results
I wish I could provide you with links to why the individual results were disqualified, but the NASA website containing most of my old links is gone or merged. (It shouldn't take more than 10-15 of poking around to find new ones, but if I don't post this comment fast, it will die unseen.) However, here's what Jame s E. Tillman , who was
on the Viking Meteorology Science Team and was Director of the Viking Computer
Facility (at the University of Washington in Seattle) said at a national Prime
Computer Users Group meeting in Orlando FL, 1984:
"The soils will liberate oxygen"? What is the justification for this assumption. None, except for post-facto guesswork. In fact, you'll find the specific chemistry cited to 'dismiss' the experiments is inconsitent with more moderns estimates of Martian soil composition and surface dynamics. Further each of the three positive experiments (deliberately designed to complement one another and prevent error) is dismissed for a very different reason.
Finally, I think that the 'atypical' kinetics that was used to discredit one experiment (positive results as a little water was added, but later tailing off) is *exactly* what we should have expected. Water may be a limiting factor for life on mars (or it may not) but after tens of millions of years, we should expect that microscopic life in a dry part of the surface would find water toxic in excess anounts. Hence - early rapid positive results, followed by a die off.
It is also possible that there are other limiting factors to growth, so the microbes reponded positively until they hit 'the wall' on another substance... like stored short term high energy compound (e.g. ATP in earth life) or even food (quick energy foods like sugars)
I urge you to go to NASA's websites and read for yourself. This is no great 'cover-up' the info is all there for you to consider. The 'embarrassing parts' are harder to find (broken links, disappearing archives, etc,) but they are not conscientiously buried.
pgp5i will eat out of
I have no idea where you got that from. It sounds like you don't either. Check out this alert in CompuWorld:
_____________
I'd rather build a 19" rack... but gee, how to do it for cheap???
I've done this. Admittedly, "cheap" is relative to the price of buying a factory made, but it wasn't that hard, and the thing is incredibly sturdy
1) The box frame is made from 1.5-2" construction angle iron. I got mine surplus, but I've seen 6-10 foot lengths from a HQ/Home Depot for $10-20. Use perforated angle iron for the two vertical corners in front. It doesn't have the same hole spacing as a 'real' rack, but that hasn't been a problem yet!
2) Half a dozen carbide masonry bits makes for a cheap way to cut the 1/2" holes I used for bolts
3) to assure squareness, structural rigidity, and a aesthetic side, I cut plywood panels slightly smaller (by the thickness of the angle iron) than the final desired dimensions. I bolted these inside the frame as templates to hold everything together as I drilled and bolted. A cheap sheet of 4ftx8ft BC grade plywood is about $11-15
4) Then I removed the panels, sheathed them in aluminum roof flashing (a single $8 roll was plenty for the whole project) It was like wrapping a huge flat present - aluminum sheet is easy to work with. Then I bolted the sheathed side and bottom panels back onto the frame as EMI/RFI shielding and structural reinforcement.
5) I used aluminum angle iron for the rack slides. I could've used steel, but I was impatient, and aluminum is much easier to cut/drill
At this point I could have stopped, painted and been done, but I decided to make this way cool.
A) I removed the panels, welded the corners (which had been bolted) and replaced the panels. It was my first real welding project, but it went pretty well. My grandkids will be able to use it in 2030.
B) I painted the frame black, and I plan on laminating some jade green marble formica veneer onto the side panels. A jade marble tower with black steel corners will outclass any commercial rack (from past experience, I know to keep a black permanent marker handy for touch-up)
I took (old-fashioned film) photos as I worked, and someday I'll get them developed, scanned and posted on the web. If I can sort them out from the 20+ other rolls of undeveloped film I have lying around (I have a darkroom I haven't used in years, but it's hard to force myself to send film *out* to be developed)
The whole project took me a week (of spare time) but it was a real hands-on rush. I'd do it again! (well, maybe... )
_____________
On the other hand, I think he failed to convey the full impact of something I found very compelling. We might very well *not* have demanded increased Article 56 burden, if we'd been at the hearings.
Right now we're looking at pro-corporate examples that make out blood boil one way, but there *is* another side, even for an ardent anti-corporatist. [Let's forget for the moment that half of SlashDot is rabidly anti-IP right now. We *have* a patent system. Let's work with that] How many of us have tinkered and invented since we were kids, and at some point considered having an inventions produced and marketed? What's the first thing you worry about? The system and being ripped off by the Big Guys. Result: no one wins. The product doesn't get made -- or gets made years later, when someone else comes up with it (and probably *that* person gets ripped off.
Most of us have wished it wasn't so difficult to get a patent. The more inventive you are, the more likely you've wished it. A lot of us would love to be able to support ourselves with our explorations of the possible... so that we could spend our lives inventing more.
But we're 'little guys'. The cost, the search, lawyers, the years to approval -- all are scary!
On the other hand, it realy burns our beans to see someone else patent something that seems 'obvious' (to us) -- often *so* obvious that it seems like the major cleverness lay in imagining the idea of patenting it. Then we start demanding more rigorous standards for patenting.
So which will it be? Easier patents or harder? I choose "easier". Why? because a corporation can more readily carry the burden of increased Artcle 56 demands than 'the little guy', the Yankee tinkerer, the one-man R+D shop. And that seems to be Dickinson's view, too. What we need is easier, more consistent, transparent and less painful patent review. Unfortunately, he simply isn't equipped to perform that review. he wants our help (on his terms, of course - whaddya expect?)
In the extreme, the patent system could be like the internet -- anyone can put up a site (stake a claim), but that claim can be shot down too. That isn't the no utopian vision it might seem. The Internet has plenty of problems that we wrestle with daily: spam, threatigation (coercion by threat of litigation -- just made it up), cybersquatters... you all know the list.
But since patents aren't hobbled by free speech concerns, which *need* to be generously oversized, due to the power differential between individuals and coercive groups (private or government), there is a reasonable opportunity to construct a system where scientific and enginneering principles reign and not 'legal principles' (oxymoron).
We don't have to have a 'wild west', we can have a collaborative 'open source patent review'
Admittedly, a lot of people (including many lawyers I know) would find purely technical grounds to be too "cold" or "restrictive". They prefer softer standards, like 'social values' or consensus, or even fantasy. That's not a slap -- we're all sometimes a little less rational that we'd like to believe. My point is: not everyone will agree with *any* patent, when it keeps them from doing what *they* want. We all secretly hate the guy who gets 'our' girl, 'our' parking place or 'our' lottery jackpot.
We'll all sometimes want to decide patents on the basis of what we imagine the consequences would be, rather than whether it is a genuine advance over prior art. We will find the battle for to make rational patent decisions is not, and may never be, as easy as we should.
My 2 cents. Harder or easier? I say easier -- both to create patents and to contest them.
_____________
We basicallycovered this all before. Not a whole lot new here!
/. too much to let it drift off course without saying something.
Good lord, I'm really getting tired of this! If you guys can't read and remember your own front page (as you've admitted you don't) then it means that you (as individuals) aren't picking topics that you (as a group) find essential reading -- and that's a terrible sign!
There's so much interesting stuff going on, but they seem to find the same old stories over and over, perhaps 1/3 of the accepted stories are retreads. CmdrTaco et al -- we love you, but maybe it's time to go to a community moderated article selection with occassional "automatically accepted" posts by you guys.
if you can't remember or even do a search on old topics when picking a new one, you are too overloaded to be doing a good job at the task of selecting topics.
There are so many other areas where we'd rather have you guys using your impressive talents!
At the very least, can we see a quarterly thread to select the "best-of" suggestions for improving SlashDot, the way we select questions for interviews? Call it a step towards RMS's view of community-based Open source, if you will, but repeats and other bad thread decisions serve no one, and I like
_____________
True, wAreZ DoodZ called themselves 'pirates', but most of us are not accustomed to taking them as experts in usage -- or much of anything. Next you'll start spelling like them...
Warez doods also consider themselves "elite" -- I suppose you agree, since you cite them as authorities. Many of them say they're studs, too. Need I go on? "Pirates" was a ill-informed usage, based on an ignorance about true piracy, and a romantization of their own actions. And make no mistake, they *did* romanticize the pirate image!
Your use of 'pirate' may be fine on a warez BBS or casual conversation. In a court, or a reasoned debate, it is inflammatory.
"Accurate"? At best, it's an analogy -- a poor one. Note that you *made up* the definition you supplied. You didn't even make a feeble attempt at accuracy. I doubt a pirate would copy your possessions and let you retain them.
"Preys on"? Boy, your momma really protected you well, if you've never seen a real victim. Illegal copying is not even in the same category as rape, murder, torture, pillage etc. Those are typical pirate acts. [Apparently, you did not understand what I said about the misuse of words such as 'murder' in my original post]
I think you are simply insensitive to the real meaning of piracy. They do still exist, and they still kill or take their victims hostage, as always. They are generally not just cargo thieves -- the helplessness of their victims on the high seas seems to bring out the worst in them. Piracy is a capital offence in most jurisdictions that allow capital offences. In some nations, the only two capital offenses are piracy and treason.
Ny two bit shoplifter who grabs a CD does worse than the criminal (and I'll grant you that part) who copies a CD, because they have taken it 100%. If my ex steals my CD, I no longer have it. *I* cannot use it. All three people are committing criminal acts, the one you call 'pirate' is actually doing the least damage *per act*
I concede that the *aggregate* effects are huge, but that does not justify the use of such strong term for the individual act. Nor does it justify trivializing the horror of true piracy. [again, see what I said about 'fur is murder']
The act of diminishing the value of a thing is not theft. Theft involves the loss of a thing.
REDUCING THE VALUE OF A THING (is less than) THEFT OF A THING (is much less than) PIRACY
If I don't keep my yard up property, I may reduce my neighbor's property values. This is not as bad as taking my neighbors property from them (theft) and not nearly as bad as capturing their houses, holding them hostage, stealing all their possessions, and possibly raping and killing them.
Accurate? HAH!
Unlawful copying is a civil wrong-doing, a violation of copyright. In a few specific situations, it may be a criminal act, but it is not theft, just as it is not "illegal dumping of toxic wastes" Under no circumstances is it "piracy"
There are many situations where common usage is different from legal usage and the usage of informed discussion. "Assault" in common usage, means an attack. In the law and informed debate, it means a threat of violence (and possibly an attempt) Hence: "Assault and battery" where battery is the actual attack.
You do a disservice to the overall debate if you cloud the terms by calling 'copying' piracy.
_____________
Most people seem to throw the word 'piracy' around as if it were just a cartoon concept: the buccaneer with eye patch, peg-leg, parrot, etc. flying a skull-and-bones
By doing this, they are revealing their own ignorance. True piracy exists on the high seas today and is one of the most serious offenses an individual can commit under international law. There have been several cases around the world where individuals have successfully sued for being libel or defamation after being called 'pirates' inappropriately (for software theft and other actions)
The term 'pirate' for software theft *was* used precisely to place the alleged activities in a more negative light in several early lawsuits. I recall discussion of this in some of the hobbyist periodicals of the early 80's like SoftTalk (perhaps when it was called "Apple something")
It is no more legitimate than calling someone who wears fur a "murderer" - 'murder' means killing a human being (or, in some jurisdictions, causing to be killed, or being involved in a criminal conspiracy resulting in death) Fur isn't murder. Eating prime rib isn't murder. stepping on an ant isn't murder. Annoying Greenpeace isn't murder.
Some additional info:
DuPlessis v. DeKlerk (South Africa) defamation suit against a broadcaster for using the term 'pirate', among other things
There was a case in the 80's in Australia, where a company that was successfully sued for illegal use and sale of commercial software (after ceasing to pay license fees), later turned around and successfully sued for the plaintiffs public use of the term 'pirate'. Unfortunately, i could not find a link for this
_____________
Woo-hoo! I love it when the speed of the internet manifests itself. It took under five minutes and a single e-mail.
The link listed in the article works now.
Massive props for being on the ball, guys!
_____________
If you want to see Alphanews click the link.
No wonder its itching for eyeballs. Their site is not available at http://www.alphanews.net as the Slashdot article stated. I presume that they advertise that URL, but their second level domain nameserver doesn't seem to resolve it yet. But a simple http://alphanews.net works just fine.
-----------------
Jes' doin' what I can to encourage people to read the links before commenting on them...
_____________
So how much will this slow "update" times?
Let's say that we want to find a street corner is Seattle, do we have to wait an extra two minutes while it downloads an animated banner at 9600 bps?
Hey, if you want a nightmare scenario:
May 27, 2002; Monday
Hey Bill!
Late for work again. The traffic lights were jammed.
I'm beginning to agree with your post on Slashdot: let's hire sacrificial hacker felons to take down the WorldWide Advertising Net!
I can usually tolerate the extra ten seconds per intersection as the electronic billboards optimize themselves for the viewing audience, but at rush hour, there's just not enough bandwidth, and the billboard delays throw the entire traffic system out of sync.
We should never have let Time-Warner subsidize our traffic lights. (Good thing my boss never knows when I'm late. His wife made him move to a fancy suburb -- they have Microslack, poor bastards. Now his commute is total obstacle course. They even rig cars to crash for the rubberneck factor. MS doesn't even pretend their crashes are accidental anymore)
Speaking of Microslack crashes, that's why I was late. The Advertising Networks servers went down. I was stuck staring at those damn 'sponsored' BSOD's for over an hour.
(BTW, I have to find a commuter route with a more compatible demographic -- if I have to see another Viagra ad, I'm getting a gun and doing some natural selection on those Viagra delivery boys on their little blue bikes and blue tights. I don't care if impulse purchases are up, I'm sick of them banging on my window. I mean do I *look* like I have that kind of problem? Heck no! I told them it was a one-time thing, because my wife was curious, but do they take me off their database? No! Instead they put my wife in. Man, when she found out I let that datum slip, I didn't need Viagra for a week -- because I was sleeping on the couch.)
Well, I gotta sign off. The phone's ringing. God, I Miss the days when I didn't have to answer! But half the office has that GPS Callee ID now, so they know damn well I'm sitting right here.
_____________
The Platypus comes in 3 flavors: The QikCACHE without an external power supply The QikDRIVE with an external power supply, and the QikDATA that has 'the added protection of automated back-up of data to an independent hard disk drive in the event of complete power loss.'
And how pray tell, does the *independent hard drive* function in the event of a complete power loss?
The QikCache is 'card only' - when you turn the computer off, it gets wiped. But that's irrelevant, since the thread is specifically about the QikDrive.
The QikDrive is 'card plus external power supply' that allows you to turn your computer off (e.g. to make hardware changes) without wiping your data. It still isn't non volatile (it wipes if the power is cut) and it costs $9840.00 for 8GB. Quantum's pricelist is down right now, but I read it was $500-600 per GB or less than half the price of the QikDrive
The QikData has "mirroring capacity" and the "capability" to transfer to a Platypus HDD with a built-in UPS. This increases the price even more -- the HDD/UPS unit is extra. You also have to load the HDD back to the QikData before you can restore service. Not good.
A nonvolatile Quantum, on the other hand is not dependent on the power. Yank the cord, pull the Quantum, take it cross country, plug it in, just like a HDD. And you have instant high-speed access
So, while I have no strong feeling about either device, I'm hard pressed to see how you give the advantage to Platypus at all, much less $8K worth! No, I'm not being sarcastic. I really am curious why you gave the QikData the advantage. At all.
The Quantum is faster in "transactions/sec" (who cares about 'peak bandwidth'?), cheaper. And can be nonvolatile, straight out of the box without extra wires and components. (You can come crying to us when a technician seeing that the server is powered down feels free to unplug the QikData power cable. A UPS doesn't help, if you're not connected to it!)
_____________
Well yah, but.... (makes sweeping Spinal Tap gesture) This one goes to eleven!
Seriously, though, there are differences. The Quantum Rushmore Ultra was a 3.5" SCSI drive, with 30MB/s transfer while the Platypus QuickDrive is a PCI card with 110MB/sec transfer. I can see how emmett though this was a noteworthy advance.
However, the Quantum had a 2 GB nonvolatile option (vs 3.2 GB volatile). The Platypus is up to 8GB but volatile only. Advantage Quantum, AFAIAC
And strangely despite the Platypus' much faster throughput, they cite 15K transactions per second, while Quantim cites 18K transactions per second. I don't know what the deal is there, but it's hard to consider this in platypus' favor. Platypus knew the specs of their existing competition, if they cite a lower transaction figure, there may be a hidden reason. (or maybe Quantum was optimistic)
BTW, I checked Quantum's 'success stories' to see who was using the Rushmore Ultra RAMdrive and how/why. They had *exactly one* success story for the RAMdrive (vs. the Rushmore HDD accelerator) and that company (iPrint) states on the first page that they didn't investigate any alternatives.
_____________
Before anyone gets carried away, please remember that these are volatile RAM drives.
The Platypus overcomes the HDD's primary liability (read/write latency) at a serious cost to the HDDs primary function: reliable storage. Note that it doesn't even have an on-board battery. It simply has a separate external Power supply and (optional) UPS
While a UPS is wonderful for keeping my system running, it's much less reliable than it needs to be if an outage (or office idiot kicking the plug out) means I lose *all* my data (sales for the day, etc.) In a sense, the platypus drive is not much stabler than having 8GB of system RAM and *no* HDD ["not much" is relative. The MTBF of a UPS is orders of magnitude less than a good HDD)
I doubt the usual high reliability filesystems could maintain a RAID/HA type redundant backup to disk precisely because the RAM HD is so much faster than the disk. It would be like having a scribe backing up your HD to quill-and-scroll -- the more you utilize the tremendous speed of the RAM HD, the farther behind the disk will fall (and thrash).
It's a nice product (though hardly a new idea), but I see it having limited application (e.g. as a HD accelerator in some server applications)
Perhaps someone can do a hardware workaround using an intermediate NVRAM between the SDRAM HD and the hard disk, using principles borrowed from both cache technology and High reliability file systems. But it'll take a bit of work.
Is there already a solution out there? Or is this essentially just a giant unidirectional HDD cache, good for serving up data faster than an HDD, but not good for critical rewritten data?
_____________
A little off-topic, but important to /. and /.'ers
/.
/.'ers how important bug reporting is. Why do we have to hunt for that link? It needs to be prominent, in several places around the site, including the 'front page'
Sometimes I notice bugs that do not seem to be in the Slashcode per se, but seem to be affecting Slashdot alone. Often these are not consistent ongoing bugs, but transient, lasting 1-3 days.
One example: one weekend, my BBC Science slashbox was filled with VA/Linux corporate links instead of articles. The problem was reproducible (on my account at least) from different machines.
I realize this may be due to changes and updating (both software and hardware), but I am of the opinion that 'bugs don'f fix themselves'. I have reported a few to slashcode, but clearly this was some sort of config error at
Also, it took me quite a bit of searching before I was moderately confident that Slashcode was the place to go. This should be in the FAQ, or better, be a separate entry in the upper left corner, along with FAQ, privacy, submit story, etc.
Slashdot: every responsible site needs a good site specific bug reporting mechanism! How would you feel about *any* company that linked you to the BBS software manufacturer, under the presumption that the underlying code may be flawed but their own site implementation and administration was perfect?
No one knows better that
_____________