"So if you accept Debian and Gentoo then its pretty idiotic to nto accept OpenSSH by the same logic, actually the later is more important to linux as a whole than the former two."
The card dons Tux the penguin, the Linux mascotte chosen by Linus himself, the linuxfund.org website has only one picture: The penguin. OpenSSH is developed by the OpenBSD Project.
More important is debatable, OpenSSH is not the only ssh2 implementation used on Linux you know (dropbear comes to mind)...
Anyway, I'm not saying OpenSSH or Wikipedia don't deserve a lot of respect from the Linux community and probably can do very good for Linux with the donated money, but for "The Linux Fund" (sorry to be pedantic, but the fund chose "Linux" over many more generic terms and IMHO should stick to it) to favour OpenSSH over so many projects much closer to "Linux" that could use a donation is a smack in the face. And Wikipedia? Come on. While they deserve a lot of support, a fund that chooses to use the "Linux" trademark in its name should be true to it. Next the "Linux fund" start giving money to Mozilla, then OpenOffice.org, all under the name of "Linux"... When you give money to a fund called "The Linux Fund", the money should go to Linux.
"I'm assuming Wikipedia runs on Linux and other GPL software and it's content is GPL licensed if I remember. OpenSSH is present on most linux systems I assume and the BSD license is GPL compatible and all that."
If it were the "GPL fund", or the "Open source fund", it would have been a different matter. OpenSSH is important for Linux, but it isn't Linux... Should Intel get money from the "Linux fund" because their processors can run Linux?
Wikipedia uses the "GNU Free Documentation License". Google uses Linux too, but should also not get money from "The Linux Fund"... The "The GNU Fund", or "The Wikipedia Fund", sure, but "The Linux Fund" giving money to Wikipedia is like, uhm, the government buying iPods... not what their money is intended for by the donors.
The difference is that if your company does well enough to pay your bills, the company gets to stay. And if your company "rakes it in", you will be jet-setting with all of the loot.
If a VC-funded company doesn't "rake it in", they have two, maybe three years and they'll want their money back (read: company liquidated, founder 'return -EONOJOB'). And if the VC-funded company does "rake it in", most of the loot goes to the VC funder, not the founder(s).
"The simple fact is that if you have 20,000 people"
You realize that most installations are for much, much smaller groups... Even in the extreme case where the entire USA would have a full-time job and work for a company like that, that would mean only 15K company installations in the USA... hardly any server volume to speak of.
"Microsoft = Enterprise Stuff, Linux/OS X = Home Desktop, Linux/Unix = Serious Server"
You're forgetting the 'Linux = Enterprise desktop' that is growing like weed right now, putting pressure on even the 15K max 'enterprise stuff' installations where you still place 'Microsoft'...
Granted, still high, but if they lose the 35% that you talk about, they're in the red.
And to cut product cost, MSFT cannot modify the materials that make up the product... They'll have to cust on expenses (marketing) and labour (jobs)...
"Vonage said late Friday that a federal appeals court has temporarily lifted an injunction granted earlier in the day that prohibited the Internet phone company from adding new customers."
First of all, evolution is not against religion or any church. Evolution is about a scientific theory supported by many scientific findings. The creation story can still be true, even with evolution happening around us. Unfortunately, too many religious people feel there is a conflict and are now in the U.S on a crusade against teaching science.
The church is not 'against evolution' (see the vatican statement), but there are some very loud religious activists in the U.S. that are (and sadly, 48% of the people in the U.S. appear to be sheeps to the loudness).
So.... A thousand years from now, people will say that the church never fought against science over evolution, those were mere fringe groups that did so... Sound familiar?
"When was that?"
Aristotle did not have the final verdict as far as the church was concerned. The earth being round was accepted by the church in exactly the same way that the vatican supports evolution _today_. Only people that will later be called 'minority' don't accept it.
During the times of Saint Augustine and later Vergiluis of Salzburg for example. About the latter, the pope said "if it shall be clearly established that he professes belief in another world and other people existing beneath the earth, or in [another] sun and moon there, thou art to hold a council, and deprive him of his sacerdotal rank, and expel him from the church."
Those 'another world', 'beneath the earth', and 'footprints above your heads' wordings in arguments surrounding 'antipodes' used by the church just shows that they did _not_ at all understand that the earth was round. Maybe they accepted it had a rounded top, but suggesting that there was anything like an other side, or people living there was blasphemy and got people in serious trouble with the church. According to the church, no people could live where we now know Australia is, because they would fall off, so nothing exists 'down there', and that was the scripture to be taught period.
But, ehm, don't worry, after accepting evolution, they can simply deny they ever not accepted that either. Besides the vatican's statements, they can simply point to the scientific research just like they now point at maps with circles from the Romans and the fact that no respected scolars of the time disagreed and say 'See nobody doubted evolution ever'...
Just like how now the Internet is filled with people claiming the church never said the earth was flat.
Right now evolution is accepted in science. Scientist know it today. It's some very vocal religious people and their (unfortunately 48% of the U.S.) followers that don't accept it today... The antipodes story is very similar on that front.
"Even the greeks knew the earth was round."
In the middle ages a lot of previous knowledge was tossed out and forgotten. You know, things like sewer systems and little details like that. Religion thrived in the same period.
USB always makes me struggle which way to put the connector in. Firewire is a little better, but still, you'd think that the people who make connectors would be able to come up with either a connector that makes it obvious which way it goes in, or one where it doesn't matter how it goes in.
We're still in the 'connector stone-age' if you ask me...
Right. The problem is that evolution goes really, really slow. We can't see hit happen in real-time, so it's hard for some people to see what is happening. The exact same thing happened before, when religious poeple were prosecuting scientists who said that the earth was not flat.
No sane religious person will argue that the earth is flat now, and hopefully the same will be the end of the story with this resistance to the results of extended and detailed scientific study into about how natural life on earth evolves.
The vatican gets it, but I guess the people who don't get it are the same people who think that being religious and being pro any kind of war can mix.
Sounds very familiar. Desk clutter is only cache anyway, if you need something and it's not there, you retrieve it from the backing store. Stuff on the desk is stuff in the pipeline for current processing. Cleaning the desk is like a pipeline flush, you'll have to spend time to refill the pipeline, so you'll lose cycles right after cleaning. Find the balance for optimal desktop management in flushing fast when needed, but try not to flush more than absolutely necessary. When you start to experience frequent pipeline stalls because of dependencies, you need to widen your datapath and reduce the number of pipeline stages (bigger desk with less tall, but more (or more complex) piles). However, be aware that a larger cache or a cache with a higher associativity increases access latency.
If you have too many projects to work on concurrently (e.g. getting too much cache access latency), go multicore (multiple desks with assignment of the most disjunct projects to different desks).
On many desks, the garbage collection algorithm often starts with an 'on-desk coffee spill', after which the garbage to be collected is a lot easier to identify. Note: since coffee stains age, it even literally includes page aging for the cache.
Not every market lends itself to erecting barriers to entry. Very few markets allow a single entity to naturally control all means to produce.
Thinking that all markets get reduced to monopolies is a very simplistic view, if you ask me... Even such a thing as 'market' is not static, but something dynamic that changes over time (meaning the 'monopoly' will have to adapt, and they are inherently bad at that). Less so in 'diamonds' and 'sugar', but more so in markets with more dynamics of the products in it (innovation), or with dynamics in the customers in it, or markets with more dynamics in the market itself (for example, interaction with other markets),
Many unregulated (parts of) markets exist where there is only one or a few 'big boys' and a whole set of 'little guys' where the little guys stand a chance because the 'big boys' are too big of a company to move quickly (and loaded by the inefficiency of bureaucracy), and the little guys fill niches in the market by innovation.
Eventually, the successful little guys end up being bought-up by a 'big boy', but they still exist and new ones will popup as long as innovation is possible in the market. It's an ecosystem.
"History shows time and again that all unregulated markets mature to monopolies. From fish mongers to real estate agents, there's rarely an exception."
The exception is markets where there is innovation. Unless of course, there is an artificial monopoly created by regulation in the form of patent or copyright law...
Re:Are they better, or just different?
on
eSATA Connectors
·
· Score: 1
Yet another connector hidden in the back where you have to keep fiddling to get the plug in... In this case two tries should suffice, but geesh I bet they spend millions coming up with another useless connector (how is it better than the sata version?). At the very least they could have made it very obvious from the outside which way the plug should go in, but the hole is symmetrical, but the internals of the connectors are very much not so.
I stand by my opinion that connector people are idiots.
The main problem is that manufacturers loudly blare the MTBF/MTTF values without telling people how long the test was done, hence they can use whatever time they like. You have to agree in the very least that even for comparison between products from different manufacturers, the MTBF is useless, for the simple fact that one manufacturer might test for 100 hours, and the other for 1000 hours...
As such an unreliable measure, the first two letter 'MTBF' stands for 'misleading'.
I didn't just say it, Carnegie Mellon University examined reliability and found 'MTBF' doesn't mean much:
"I'm glad you found it so easy. And did you observe the same inexplicable 30 second freeze up while it created the graph?"
While it was creating the graph, there was a burst of CPU usage that did seem a little excessive, but I didn't time it and it didn't bother me enough to thing about timing it.
You can report OpenOffice bugs or enhancement requests on-line. A quick look aroung the openoffice website found this place for that: http://qa.openoffice.org/
If you report it, and somebody fixes it, then I guess you can save $500 per computer...
'Using OO, I invite you to create 2 columns of 2048 numbers, select them, and create a line graph. Nothing fancy or exotic. Then tell me graphing is "easily well done" using OO.'
Ok, I had never used openoffice spreadsheets to make a graph, but I took your challenge and it was surprisingly easy, with most time spent on the 'pg dn' key going down to row 2048.
So here it is: "Graphing is easily well done using OO".
It took me longer to make this post than to startup openoffice (without quickstart), open a spreadsheet, make two columns, the second the sqrt() of the first, make aline graph of it, and resize it a bitto appreciate the curve.
When you think about it: 2^20 is actually pretty much 10^6 plus a low sales tax anyway, and almost nobody seems to complain that sales tax is not included on the prices listed in the stores either...
No you don't work for AMD. How do I know that? I know that because the high-K material for future chips is not used to replace the silicon substrate, and you just read some media articles and now think you're an expert.
Slashdot Mirror
'Perhaps, though it always was about the "Linux community", however one defines that. OpenSSH is certainly important to the Linux community.'
The openssh.org website states on the front page "OpenSSH is developed by the OpenBSD Project."
Very similar, but different community...
"So if you accept Debian and Gentoo then its pretty idiotic to nto accept OpenSSH by the same logic, actually the later is more important to linux as a whole than the former two."
The card dons Tux the penguin, the Linux mascotte chosen by Linus himself, the linuxfund.org website has only one picture: The penguin. OpenSSH is developed by the OpenBSD Project.
That's the mismatch right there.
http://news.com.com/2100-1001-230345.html
http://www.openssh.org/
More important is debatable, OpenSSH is not the only ssh2 implementation used on Linux you know (dropbear comes to mind)...
Anyway, I'm not saying OpenSSH or Wikipedia don't deserve a lot of respect from the Linux community and probably can do very good for Linux with the donated money, but for "The Linux Fund" (sorry to be pedantic, but the fund chose "Linux" over many more generic terms and IMHO should stick to it) to favour OpenSSH over so many projects much closer to "Linux" that could use a donation is a smack in the face. And Wikipedia? Come on. While they deserve a lot of support, a fund that chooses to use the "Linux" trademark in its name should be true to it. Next the "Linux fund" start giving money to Mozilla, then OpenOffice.org, all under the name of "Linux"... When you give money to a fund called "The Linux Fund", the money should go to Linux.
"The LinuxFund was never strictly about Linux"
Then they should have used a different name and IMHO deserve their fate for abusing the trademark.
"I'm assuming Wikipedia runs on Linux and other GPL software and it's content is GPL licensed if I remember. OpenSSH is present on most linux systems I assume and the BSD license is GPL compatible and all that."
If it were the "GPL fund", or the "Open source fund", it would have been a different matter. OpenSSH is important for Linux, but it isn't Linux... Should Intel get money from the "Linux fund" because their processors can run Linux?
Wikipedia uses the "GNU Free Documentation License". Google uses Linux too, but should also not get money from "The Linux Fund"... The "The GNU Fund", or "The Wikipedia Fund", sure, but "The Linux Fund" giving money to Wikipedia is like, uhm, the government buying iPods... not what their money is intended for by the donors.
Maybe I missed something, but what is the "Linux Fund" doing giving money to Wikipedia (== Linux how?) and OpenSSH (== BSD licensed)?
The difference is that if your company does well enough to pay your bills, the company gets to stay. And if your company "rakes it in", you will be jet-setting with all of the loot.
If a VC-funded company doesn't "rake it in", they have two, maybe three years and they'll want their money back (read: company liquidated, founder 'return -EONOJOB'). And if the VC-funded company does "rake it in", most of the loot goes to the VC funder, not the founder(s).
That's where VC money isn't free...
"The simple fact is that if you have 20,000 people"
You realize that most installations are for much, much smaller groups... Even in the extreme case where the entire USA would have a full-time job and work for a company like that, that would mean only 15K company installations in the USA... hardly any server volume to speak of.
"Microsoft = Enterprise Stuff, Linux/OS X = Home Desktop, Linux/Unix = Serious Server"
You're forgetting the 'Linux = Enterprise desktop' that is growing like weed right now, putting pressure on even the 15K max 'enterprise stuff' installations where you still place 'Microsoft'...
"Microsoft can go from being the number one software company with 65% margins to an also ran with 30% margins"
Can go? They already have...
MSFT profit margin 25%, operating margin 36%
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ks?s=MSFT
Granted, still high, but if they lose the 35% that you talk about, they're in the red.
And to cut product cost, MSFT cannot modify the materials that make up the product... They'll have to cust on expenses (marketing) and labour (jobs)...
partly...
Vonage: Appeals court says we can continue to sign up customers
http://news.com.com/2061-10804_3-6174148.html
"Vonage said late Friday that a federal appeals court has temporarily lifted an injunction granted earlier in the day that prohibited the Internet phone company from adding new customers."
Don't worry, you're only off by more people than the entire population of, say, Germany...
t ml
http://www.census.gov/population/www/popclockus.h
"Unfortunately as some think the Vatican is Devil's spawn, this wouldn't work for them. Actually it may reinforce their belief."
Shouldn't they be nailing letters to church doors about it then?
First of all, evolution is not against religion or any church. Evolution is about a scientific theory supported by many scientific findings. The creation story can still be true, even with evolution happening around us. Unfortunately, too many religious people feel there is a conflict and are now in the U.S on a crusade against teaching science.
The church is not 'against evolution' (see the vatican statement), but there are some very loud religious activists in the U.S. that are (and sadly, 48% of the people in the U.S. appear to be sheeps to the loudness).
So.... A thousand years from now, people will say that the church never fought against science over evolution, those were mere fringe groups that did so... Sound familiar?
"When was that?"
Aristotle did not have the final verdict as far as the church was concerned. The earth being round was accepted by the church in exactly the same way that the vatican supports evolution _today_. Only people that will later be called 'minority' don't accept it.
During the times of Saint Augustine and later Vergiluis of Salzburg for example. About the latter, the pope said "if it shall be clearly established that he professes belief in another world and other people existing beneath the earth, or in [another] sun and moon there, thou art to hold a council, and deprive him of his sacerdotal rank, and expel him from the church."
Those 'another world', 'beneath the earth', and 'footprints above your heads' wordings in arguments surrounding 'antipodes' used by the church just shows that they did _not_ at all understand that the earth was round. Maybe they accepted it had a rounded top, but suggesting that there was anything like an other side, or people living there was blasphemy and got people in serious trouble with the church. According to the church, no people could live where we now know Australia is, because they would fall off, so nothing exists 'down there', and that was the scripture to be taught period.
But, ehm, don't worry, after accepting evolution, they can simply deny they ever not accepted that either. Besides the vatican's statements, they can simply point to the scientific research just like they now point at maps with circles from the Romans and the fact that no respected scolars of the time disagreed and say 'See nobody doubted evolution ever'...
Just like how now the Internet is filled with people claiming the church never said the earth was flat.
Right now evolution is accepted in science. Scientist know it today. It's some very vocal religious people and their (unfortunately 48% of the U.S.) followers that don't accept it today... The antipodes story is very similar on that front.
"Even the greeks knew the earth was round."
In the middle ages a lot of previous knowledge was tossed out and forgotten. You know, things like sewer systems and little details like that. Religion thrived in the same period.
USB always makes me struggle which way to put the connector in. Firewire is a little better, but still, you'd think that the people who make connectors would be able to come up with either a connector that makes it obvious which way it goes in, or one where it doesn't matter how it goes in.
We're still in the 'connector stone-age' if you ask me...
Right. The problem is that evolution goes really, really slow. We can't see hit happen in real-time, so it's hard for some people to see what is happening. The exact same thing happened before, when religious poeple were prosecuting scientists who said that the earth was not flat.
t ion.php
No sane religious person will argue that the earth is flat now, and hopefully the same will be the end of the story with this resistance to the results of extended and detailed scientific study into about how natural life on earth evolves.
The vatican gets it, but I guess the people who don't get it are the same people who think that being religious and being pro any kind of war can mix.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10101394/
http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/01/18/news/evolu
Sounds very familiar. Desk clutter is only cache anyway, if you need something and it's not there, you retrieve it from the backing store. Stuff on the desk is stuff in the pipeline for current processing. Cleaning the desk is like a pipeline flush, you'll have to spend time to refill the pipeline, so you'll lose cycles right after cleaning. Find the balance for optimal desktop management in flushing fast when needed, but try not to flush more than absolutely necessary. When you start to experience frequent pipeline stalls because of dependencies, you need to widen your datapath and reduce the number of pipeline stages (bigger desk with less tall, but more (or more complex) piles). However, be aware that a larger cache or a cache with a higher associativity increases access latency.
If you have too many projects to work on concurrently (e.g. getting too much cache access latency), go multicore (multiple desks with assignment of the most disjunct projects to different desks).
Bleh.
On many desks, the garbage collection algorithm often starts with an 'on-desk coffee spill', after which the garbage to be collected is a lot easier to identify. Note: since coffee stains age, it even literally includes page aging for the cache.
Not every market lends itself to erecting barriers to entry. Very few markets allow a single entity to naturally control all means to produce.
Thinking that all markets get reduced to monopolies is a very simplistic view, if you ask me... Even such a thing as 'market' is not static, but something dynamic that changes over time (meaning the 'monopoly' will have to adapt, and they are inherently bad at that). Less so in 'diamonds' and 'sugar', but more so in markets with more dynamics of the products in it (innovation), or with dynamics in the customers in it, or markets with more dynamics in the market itself (for example, interaction with other markets),
Many unregulated (parts of) markets exist where there is only one or a few 'big boys' and a whole set of 'little guys' where the little guys stand a chance because the 'big boys' are too big of a company to move quickly (and loaded by the inefficiency of bureaucracy), and the little guys fill niches in the market by innovation.
Eventually, the successful little guys end up being bought-up by a 'big boy', but they still exist and new ones will popup as long as innovation is possible in the market. It's an ecosystem.
"History shows time and again that all unregulated markets mature to monopolies. From fish mongers to real estate agents, there's rarely an exception."
The exception is markets where there is innovation. Unless of course, there is an artificial monopoly created by regulation in the form of patent or copyright law...
Yet another connector hidden in the back where you have to keep fiddling to get the plug in... In this case two tries should suffice, but geesh I bet they spend millions coming up with another useless connector (how is it better than the sata version?). At the very least they could have made it very obvious from the outside which way the plug should go in, but the hole is symmetrical, but the internals of the connectors are very much not so.
I stand by my opinion that connector people are idiots.
The main problem is that manufacturers loudly blare the MTBF/MTTF values without telling people how long the test was done, hence they can use whatever time they like. You have to agree in the very least that even for comparison between products from different manufacturers, the MTBF is useless, for the simple fact that one manufacturer might test for 100 hours, and the other for 1000 hours...
r /schroeder_html/index.html
As such an unreliable measure, the first two letter 'MTBF' stands for 'misleading'.
I didn't just say it, Carnegie Mellon University examined reliability and found 'MTBF' doesn't mean much:
http://www.usenix.org/events/fast07/tech/schroede
Mine were down until about 15:08pm eastern, they're up now.
"I'm glad you found it so easy. And did you observe the same inexplicable 30 second freeze up while it created the graph?"
While it was creating the graph, there was a burst of CPU usage that did seem a little excessive, but I didn't time it and it didn't bother me enough to thing about timing it.
You can report OpenOffice bugs or enhancement requests on-line. A quick look aroung the openoffice website found this place for that: http://qa.openoffice.org/
If you report it, and somebody fixes it, then I guess you can save $500 per computer...
'Using OO, I invite you to create 2 columns of 2048 numbers, select them, and create a line graph. Nothing fancy or exotic. Then tell me graphing is "easily well done" using OO.'
Ok, I had never used openoffice spreadsheets to make a graph, but I took your challenge and it was surprisingly easy, with most time spent on the 'pg dn' key going down to row 2048.
So here it is: "Graphing is easily well done using OO".
It took me longer to make this post than to startup openoffice (without quickstart), open a spreadsheet, make two columns, the second the sqrt() of the first, make aline graph of it, and resize it a bitto appreciate the curve.
You probably meant 10^6 where you typed 10^3...
When you think about it: 2^20 is actually pretty much 10^6 plus a low sales tax anyway, and almost nobody seems to complain that sales tax is not included on the prices listed in the stores either...
No you don't work for AMD. How do I know that? I know that because the high-K material for future chips is not used to replace the silicon substrate, and you just read some media articles and now think you're an expert.