Your local library may offer e-books you can read just fine on a Nook, the Canberra library system does. All you need then is a friend in the US with a credit card;-)
It lets you self-host a HTML widget(s) and works on Win32, OSX and Linux. Its a wrapper around the Chromium browser, I use it in the Steam client for showing web pages in our thick app.
You have missed the point of the paper. The N=4 and T=5 values equate to a maximum reach of 484 clients for a query. To reach "napster" sizes of 1million you need T=7 and N=8.
That explains the different numbers.
However, I do agree that a couple numbers seem to be plucked from mid-air, but the argument and maths seems fine:)
But you don't solve chess, you would calculate "End Game tablebases" which are large lookup tables that tell you a game result given a chess (board) position. I believe that the 5 piece EGTB has been fully calculated, with parts of the 6 having been done too (ones involving queens?).
It wouldn't work for a real chess game, the latency between the "nodes" is too large for a realtime chess game. I wrote a parallel chess implementation (parallelised the AB game tree search) on a Beowulf and that was pushing the latency requirements (I got down to 50msec).
What Dnet would be good for is move searches and end game tables, tables that specifiy a board position and the final outcome of that game:)
That is why they are pushing ASN.1 for wireless apps, but for the internet at large I contend that the complexity introduced by ASN.1 (and debugging problems) greatly outweigh the bandwidth benefits, especially if you consider using a seperate compression layer.
Its tha devils spawn I tell ya.
Its extremely complex and hard to debug.
The whole reason the net has taken off so quickly is the simple, open and clear protocols used. You need to debug your email server? Just telnet in and talk to it! With ASN.1 you need a compiler to make each damn data packet.
Its a case of a trade off between bandwidth and computing power. ASN.1 requires CPU (and lots of debugging) while HTML,etc require bandwidth:)
The problem is that most network admins are lazy/stupid/too busy. Spoofing is almost trivial to stop (just block the egress of packets not from your addr range), and all routers I know of can currently perform spoofing protection.
Despite this, most networks allow spoofing. Why? Because its another step that people don't have the time to do. Its the same reason that people run windows, its just easier to do it.
Perhaps when everyone is tech savy, or when laws get passed requiring a duty of care things will get better, but until then expect the path of least resistance to be followed (the one that doesn't include turning on "spoof protection").
You should see the amount of network scans my poor linux box gets because it is on the ADSL network. My bet is that the network is a prime killing ground for idiot users, and the blame rests soley on Telstra. It would be almost trivial for them to stop 99% of there problems (can we say firewall..., block netbios ports,etc...).
Not only where they breaching security, they were stealing from their employer. Idle CPU time is not free, when SETI is running the CPU can't shutdown into low power mode...
aaahh, how can people say this?
First, wireless needs the use of the EM spectrum which we all share. Fibre is a waveguide, so you can run what you want over it without interfering with others. So you want to run 2.5Gbps over wireless. Fine, no one else in the neighbourhood can tho.
As for satelite, they are a bloody long way up and they see lots of people. So latency is VERY bad and the bandwidth per person sucks. That and to talk to satelites you need big antenna.
Or maybe you were thinking or iriduim (or similar ideas?). Same bandwidth sharing problem.
Just remember, bandwidth is only infinite if you have a fibre. IF you want to run through the air, you have to compete with everyone else.
UF is funny, and on so many levels. Even if one of the "supposedly" clueless users happens to stumble upon the site they would never understand the humor that was a jibe against them, they would see the lower levels.
I have noticed this movement of authors away from horrific cyberpunk (cybernetic people) to a more orgaic representation, where technology and humans live side by side.
Slashdot Mirror
Your local library may offer e-books you can read just fine on a Nook, the Canberra library system does. All you need then is a friend in the US with a credit card ;-)
Look at CEF: http://code.google.com/p/chromiumembedded/
It lets you self-host a HTML widget(s) and works on Win32, OSX and Linux. Its a wrapper around the Chromium browser, I use it in the Steam client for showing web pages in our thick app.
You have missed the point of the paper. The N=4 and T=5 values equate to a maximum reach of 484 clients for a query. To reach "napster" sizes of 1million you need T=7 and N=8.
:)
That explains the different numbers.
However, I do agree that a couple numbers seem to be plucked from mid-air, but the argument and maths seems fine
But you don't solve chess, you would calculate "End Game tablebases" which are large lookup tables that tell you a game result given a chess (board) position. I believe that the 5 piece EGTB has been fully calculated, with parts of the 6 having been done too (ones involving queens?).
Dammit, remember to re-read the post before hitting submit ;)
:)
50usec NOT 50msec
it had a simple star toplogy from the master node.
It wouldn't work for a real chess game, the latency between the "nodes" is too large for a realtime chess game. I wrote a parallel chess implementation (parallelised the AB game tree search) on a Beowulf and that was pushing the latency requirements (I got down to 50msec). :)
What Dnet would be good for is move searches and end game tables, tables that specifiy a board position and the final outcome of that game
That is why they are pushing ASN.1 for wireless apps, but for the internet at large I contend that the complexity introduced by ASN.1 (and debugging problems) greatly outweigh the bandwidth benefits, especially if you consider using a seperate compression layer.
Its tha devils spawn I tell ya.
:)
Its extremely complex and hard to debug.
The whole reason the net has taken off so quickly is the simple, open and clear protocols used. You need to debug your email server? Just telnet in and talk to it! With ASN.1 you need a compiler to make each damn data packet.
Its a case of a trade off between bandwidth and computing power. ASN.1 requires CPU (and lots of debugging) while HTML,etc require bandwidth
Ahh, but a DDOS attack becomes a lot more dangerous when spoofing is performed.
The problem is that most network admins are lazy/stupid/too busy. Spoofing is almost trivial to stop (just block the egress of packets not from your addr range), and all routers I know of can currently perform spoofing protection.
Despite this, most networks allow spoofing. Why? Because its another step that people don't have the time to do. Its the same reason that people run windows, its just easier to do it.
Perhaps when everyone is tech savy, or when laws get passed requiring a duty of care things will get better, but until then expect the path of least resistance to be followed (the one that doesn't include turning on "spoof protection").
You should see the amount of network scans my poor linux box gets because it is on the ADSL network. My bet is that the network is a prime killing ground for idiot users, and the blame rests soley on Telstra. It would be almost trivial for them to stop 99% of there problems (can we say firewall..., block netbios ports,etc...).
;)
nuff said.
Not only where they breaching security, they were stealing from their employer. Idle CPU time is not free, when SETI is running the CPU can't shutdown into low power mode...
aaahh, how can people say this?
First, wireless needs the use of the EM spectrum which we all share. Fibre is a waveguide, so you can run what you want over it without interfering with others. So you want to run 2.5Gbps over wireless. Fine, no one else in the neighbourhood can tho.
As for satelite, they are a bloody long way up and they see lots of people. So latency is VERY bad and the bandwidth per person sucks. That and to talk to satelites you need big antenna.
Or maybe you were thinking or iriduim (or similar ideas?). Same bandwidth sharing problem.
Just remember, bandwidth is only infinite if you have a fibre. IF you want to run through the air, you have to compete with everyone else.
with a small whiff I could detect SPAM in my mailbox, imagine the time I could save each day :)
And image the smell you could send to the sender of the SPAM. Can you say sh*t ?
:)
UF is funny, and on so many levels.
Even if one of the "supposedly" clueless users happens to stumble upon the site they would never understand the humor that was a jibe against them, they would see the lower levels.
Well, thats what I think anyway!
I have noticed this movement of authors away from horrific cyberpunk (cybernetic people) to a more orgaic representation, where technology and humans live side by side.
:P (always wanted that!)
Well, thats just my $0.02
Oh, and first post
IT is real !!! :)
gee, this humble pie tastes great
I have just been enjoying a game of mario64
it does not run (well) om a k6200 or p200
but it is fine on a pII333
DAMM GOOD JOB !!