djbdns requires seperate machines for almost everything.
Granted I'm not a DNS wizard but I don't think this is the case. In the worst case you could say that djbdns requires separate IP addresses for everything. Except that really isn't the case anymore, as I understand it.
For all of the complaints about the Outlook/Exchange monoculture and its susceptibility to exploits that you see on slashdot, I'd really expect more people to be using things like djbdns and fixing the holes in it rather than complaining. I'd rather patch djbdns to add minimal functionality than patch BIND to fix major security problems.
Granted Berstein isn't the most affable character in the world, but I don't pick my software based on the personality of the people who write it.
I've never bothered to read much about.NET but it's my understanding that it doesn't actually work all that seamlessly..NET doesn't run C code. It runs "managed C". It doesn't run Eiffel. It runs "managed Eiffel". I have no idea what that means in practical real world terms, but I'd be surprised if that meant you could take random Eiffel code from off the net and have it work happily under.NET. So you're back where you started. You need someone on the team with Eiffel experience to use that Eiffel code.
You don't OWN software, you have a license to use it. Even with so-called FREE software. I can't do whatever I want with GPLed software. I have to abide by the terms of its license. Even if you're just using no-CD cracks, you aren't licensed to do so. You might as well say, "Well, it's INCONVENIENT for me to abide by all of the terms of the GPL so I just won't redistribute my modificiations. After all, I BOUGHT these Red Hat CDs."
There's an unfortunate focus on the mainstream in commerce these days.
How exactly is this new? I'd say there is LESS focus on the mainstream today than at almost any time in the past. Can you imagine, say, a shoemaker in the 1500s marketing to Jews because it was "cool" to be countercultural and antiestablishment like that? I dunno about where you live but every record store I've ever gone to the largest section is "Alternative".
The title and the summary didn't mention this was going to be an XP feature or I would have skipped it. What's the point of a summary if it doesn't accurately summarize the article?
You're kidding right? In the next four and a half billion years we'll be able to figure out how to negate that little problem, too. Or we just go extinct. Why do you care if the human species becomes extinct?
Gee and in the past 10,000 years we've gone from not even having pet dogs to genetically engineering and cloning said pet dogs. I think in the next 100,000 years we might be able to do something about a stupid little asteroid. Er, actually, we could probably do something about an asteroid today if we had to. So rather than spend a few thousand years researching how to migrate 8 billion people into space when that asteroid hits why not spend the next few thousand years avoiding the cataclysmic event in the first place?
Abrash is a great guy who has done great stuff but that article was total fluff. If it weren't for hero worship it would never have been posted. If Joe Schmoe had written it, it would still be languishing on some never visited web page. I got to the end and kept looking for a link to the next page because I couldn't believe that was all there was too it. I think that article was kinda like the geek equivalent of the post-game locker-room interview. "Well, we just gotta get out there and do our best and give it our all and work a team and whichever teams wants it more will get it!"
Re:People are missing the point.
on
MySQL FS
·
· Score: 2
If a filesystem is a database is a filesystem and getting BLOBs out of a database is so hard, why don't you just store the pathname in the database and the image in the filesystem? I'm having a hard time envisioning storing images in a database as being "often necessary". But what do I know?:-)
Urs Holzle and David Ungar. Optimizing dynamically-dispatched calls with run-time type feedback. In PLDI '94 Conference Proceedings.
Urs Holzle, Craig Chambers, and David Ungar. Optimizing Dynamically-Typed Object-Oriented Languages with Polymorphic Inline Caches. In ECOOP '91 Conference Proceedings.
Craig Chambers and David Ungar. Making Pure Object-Oriented Languages Practical. OOPSLA '91 Conference Proceedings.
Craig Chambers, David Ungar, and Elgin Lee. And Efficient Implementation of SELF, a Dynamically-Typed Object-Oriented Language Based on Prototypes. In OOPSLA '89 Conference Proceedings.
Also of interest from the same authors is "Do Object-Oriented Languages need special hardware support?" in which they find that "in summary, our data show that execution behavior is more a function of compiler technology than of the source language characteristics."
The SELF compiler, which by now is very dated, required three to five RISC instructions to perform the dispatch test. It also eliminated "more than 75% of all dispach tests, i.e., less than one in four source-level message sends actually involves runtime dispatch overhead."
And since 1650 they have become vastly less repressive. From where do you start and stop the measuring? He said "historically" which to me implies a time scale or more than a few years.
Historically speaking, governments rarely get less repressive over time
I don't buy it. If that's the case then how come in the past 4,000 years we haven't managed to devolve completely into utter and complete tyranny and repression?
Every nation I can think of right now has become less, rather than more, repressive in recent history.
the world is only a limited number of steps away from UN domination in this area, which has been strongly pro-business and anti-person.
Pray tell, how is the UN strongly pro-business and anti-person? And how is it going to dominate anyone or anything?
AFAIK, if you have a copyright in any signatory of the Berne convention on intellectual property then you have a copyright in all other signatories. I don't know who exactly is and isn't a signatory, but I get the impression it's most countries. Whether the copyright is actually enforced is another story....
They shouldn't be mentioning release dates when they really have no idea what the hell they're talking about. When was 2.4 originally supposed to come out? Like a year ago? What happened to that date? And now there's something from Linus saying early December, hopefully. Hell, it's almost early January. Since they obviously have no clue what they're talking about why even mention a release date in the first place?
Why not just say "It'll be done when it's done" and leave it at that rather than pulling dates out of thin air that obviously mean nothing?
And what exactly would you do once your were living on this moon base instead of your crappy condo in Cambridge? Do you really think it would be cheaper and better? Would your net connection be more reliable? How would you afford to move there anyway? How much are lift costs right now? If there were a moon base would they have dropped enough that someone who can only afford a crappy condo in Cambridge could afford to move to the moon?
All those things you listed are just ways to get to the moon. What's the point of building a moon base?
GPL - license for authors who wish to garantee that all dirivative works based on their code also be relesed under the same free software license.
The GPL doesn't guarantee this. For instance, look at clause 9. Sure, we all think the FSF are a bunch of great guys who would never dick around with anyone. Except if I was, say, Apple, releasing my source code I can't think of a single reason why I would give the FSF that kind of power.
Slashdot Mirror
djbdns requires seperate machines for almost everything.
Granted I'm not a DNS wizard but I don't think this is the case. In the worst case you could say that djbdns requires separate IP addresses for everything. Except that really isn't the case anymore, as I understand it.
For all of the complaints about the Outlook/Exchange monoculture and its susceptibility to exploits that you see on slashdot, I'd really expect more people to be using things like djbdns and fixing the holes in it rather than complaining. I'd rather patch djbdns to add minimal functionality than patch BIND to fix major security problems.
Granted Berstein isn't the most affable character in the world, but I don't pick my software based on the personality of the people who write it.
I've never bothered to read much about .NET but it's my understanding that it doesn't actually work all that seamlessly. .NET doesn't run C code. It runs "managed C". It doesn't run Eiffel. It runs "managed Eiffel". I have no idea what that means in practical real world terms, but I'd be surprised if that meant you could take random Eiffel code from off the net and have it work happily under .NET. So you're back where you started. You need someone on the team with Eiffel experience to use that Eiffel code.
You don't OWN software, you have a license to use it. Even with so-called FREE software. I can't do whatever I want with GPLed software. I have to abide by the terms of its license. Even if you're just using no-CD cracks, you aren't licensed to do so. You might as well say, "Well, it's INCONVENIENT for me to abide by all of the terms of the GPL so I just won't redistribute my modificiations. After all, I BOUGHT these Red Hat CDs."
Who gets to be the Certificate Authority? Are they going to charge as much as current commercial CAs do to verify your identity?
There's an unfortunate focus on the mainstream in commerce these days.
How exactly is this new? I'd say there is LESS focus on the mainstream today than at almost any time in the past. Can you imagine, say, a shoemaker in the 1500s marketing to Jews because it was "cool" to be countercultural and antiestablishment like that? I dunno about where you live but every record store I've ever gone to the largest section is "Alternative".
The title and the summary didn't mention this was going to be an XP feature or I would have skipped it. What's the point of a summary if it doesn't accurately summarize the article?
Actually, I think it's the GPL people who are assuming there is an intrinsic right to use code. That's the whole point of "free" software, after all.
You're kidding right? In the next four and a half billion years we'll be able to figure out how to negate that little problem, too. Or we just go extinct. Why do you care if the human species becomes extinct?
Gee and in the past 10,000 years we've gone from not even having pet dogs to genetically engineering and cloning said pet dogs. I think in the next 100,000 years we might be able to do something about a stupid little asteroid. Er, actually, we could probably do something about an asteroid today if we had to. So rather than spend a few thousand years researching how to migrate 8 billion people into space when that asteroid hits why not spend the next few thousand years avoiding the cataclysmic event in the first place?
Abrash is a great guy who has done great stuff but that article was total fluff. If it weren't for hero worship it would never have been posted. If Joe Schmoe had written it, it would still be languishing on some never visited web page. I got to the end and kept looking for a link to the next page because I couldn't believe that was all there was too it. I think that article was kinda like the geek equivalent of the post-game locker-room interview. "Well, we just gotta get out there and do our best and give it our all and work a team and whichever teams wants it more will get it!"
If a filesystem is a database is a filesystem and getting BLOBs out of a database is so hard, why don't you just store the pathname in the database and the image in the filesystem? I'm having a hard time envisioning storing images in a database as being "often necessary". But what do I know? :-)
They can't be optimized away?
You might want to check out:
Urs Holzle and David Ungar. Optimizing dynamically-dispatched calls with run-time type feedback. In PLDI '94 Conference Proceedings.
Urs Holzle, Craig Chambers, and David Ungar. Optimizing Dynamically-Typed Object-Oriented Languages with Polymorphic Inline Caches. In ECOOP '91 Conference Proceedings.
Craig Chambers and David Ungar. Making Pure Object-Oriented Languages Practical. OOPSLA '91 Conference Proceedings.
Craig Chambers, David Ungar, and Elgin Lee. And Efficient Implementation of SELF, a Dynamically-Typed Object-Oriented Language Based on Prototypes. In OOPSLA '89 Conference Proceedings.
Also of interest from the same authors is "Do Object-Oriented Languages need special hardware support?" in which they find that "in summary, our data show that execution behavior is more a function of compiler technology than of the source language characteristics."
The SELF compiler, which by now is very dated, required three to five RISC instructions to perform the dispatch test. It also eliminated "more than 75% of all dispach tests, i.e., less than one in four source-level message sends actually involves runtime dispatch overhead."
And in SELF, every method is virtual.
So, I reiterate: It's a compiler issue.
On the other hand a compiler could spend time optimizing this stuff more (maybe more inlining of those tiny calls at least).
Or in other words, it's a compiler issue. Which is pretty much exactly what he said in the first place.
And since 1650 they have become vastly less repressive. From where do you start and stop the measuring? He said "historically" which to me implies a time scale or more than a few years.
Historically speaking, governments rarely get less repressive over time
I don't buy it. If that's the case then how come in the past 4,000 years we haven't managed to devolve completely into utter and complete tyranny and repression?
Every nation I can think of right now has become less, rather than more, repressive in recent history.
the world is only a limited number of steps away from UN domination in this area, which has been strongly pro-business and anti-person.
Pray tell, how is the UN strongly pro-business and anti-person? And how is it going to dominate anyone or anything?
Wrong. It is both the most important and most basic human right. Once you grant it, all others follow. Once it has been denied, no others can stand.
Do you actually have a logical argument supporting this claim?
I don't see any articles on /. complaining about how Wal-Mart is denying me my "rights" because they are choosing not to carry the abortion pill.
AFAIK, if you have a copyright in any signatory of the Berne convention on intellectual property then you have a copyright in all other signatories. I don't know who exactly is and isn't a signatory, but I get the impression it's most countries. Whether the copyright is actually enforced is another story....
What would registering get you except to possibly make it slightly easier to prove your case in court?
Do you submit a separate copyright application for every version? Every CVS nightly build?
Even if you haven't registered the copyright you still have a copyright and can sue just fine; I've known people who have done it.
They shouldn't be mentioning release dates when they really have no idea what the hell they're talking about. When was 2.4 originally supposed to come out? Like a year ago? What happened to that date? And now there's something from Linus saying early December, hopefully. Hell, it's almost early January. Since they obviously have no clue what they're talking about why even mention a release date in the first place?
Why not just say "It'll be done when it's done" and leave it at that rather than pulling dates out of thin air that obviously mean nothing?
Yeah, I guess if you count prerelease test kernels.
And what exactly would you do once your were living on this moon base instead of your crappy condo in Cambridge? Do you really think it would be cheaper and better? Would your net connection be more reliable? How would you afford to move there anyway? How much are lift costs right now? If there were a moon base would they have dropped enough that someone who can only afford a crappy condo in Cambridge could afford to move to the moon?
All those things you listed are just ways to get to the moon. What's the point of building a moon base?
You didn't think Samba de Amigo, Crazy Taxi, Space Channel 5, or Pokemon had the least bit of originality?
How does it approach zero? Technology doesn't design weapons all by itself.
GPL - license for authors who wish to garantee that all dirivative works based on their code also be relesed under the same free software license.
The GPL doesn't guarantee this. For instance, look at clause 9. Sure, we all think the FSF are a bunch of great guys who would never dick around with anyone. Except if I was, say, Apple, releasing my source code I can't think of a single reason why I would give the FSF that kind of power.