is that you need to get the Zend Performance suite, or at least the Code Accellerator, if you want the best performance from your scripts. Spend the bucks, then your code will run 15-20 times faster.
The article specifically mentions these. I've seen these first hand - they're usually poorly produced 'Greatest Hits' collections from defunct artists with typically shoddy artwork.
I thought they were something specifically produced for this market, but after reading the article I think the RIAA has the right to go after these guys. Its one thing to make copies for personal use, but entirely another to mass produce and sell them in a convenience store chain.
Re:Is google becoming a central point of failure?
on
HotBot Returns
·
· Score: 2
Would you consider the uninterrupted usage of Google payment, or do you want something monetary? If monetary, what price and how do you want it paid?
If the new service was an academic thing, not for profit, I would lend my processor cycles to be able to use it. But in the case of running part of Google, I'd like a royalty for my part in contributing to Googles bottom line.
In fact I think you might be onto an idea that someone will eventually implement. Google's backend is spread out amongst 10,000 PC-class machines. Each of those machines "earns" $100 for every million Google brings in. So a royalty would be fair and if you paid one, you could easily find enough people out there willing to do it in order to make it feasible.
Re:Is google becoming a central point of failure?
on
HotBot Returns
·
· Score: 2
Will this affect people severely?
Would google be an ideal grid computing idea? Would you donate disk space / processor cycles to run distributed google?
Please, if you can answer this question, I'd really appreciate it. As it now stands, if I see someone holding a gun, I have no way to know whether they're going to shoot me or not. I'd really like to know when it's ok to call 911 without infringing on the second amendment.
An honest, armed citizen will not point a gun at you unless he intends to use it. Therefore, for your purposes, when you see someone pointing a gun at you, rather than concern yourself whether they are a thug or an honest citizen, my advice would be to either to duck, run, or start negotiating.
is just playing into what PHB's want to hear. If his company or Sun or Microsoft manages to sell their IT automation products it will be done so largely because they are attempting to pull the wool over management's eyes and bypassing the recommendations of IT people. This is a fundamentally bad way to approach selling tech solutions to companies, as should be obvious to most of us here.
Furthermore, the same people who would be interested in these solutions are the ones who are going to balk when they are told that in order to implement these solutions, they have to rip out all their Cobol code and replace it with something else, replace any EDI they are doing with XML, and ditch any old tech they have in use like their modems, dot-matrix printers, etc. I'm not holding my breath.
The real problem for IT is that our management and coworkers don't understand what we do. My solution is to offer to educate these people as much as possible. I'm lucky enough to have a manager who has dabbled in Perl enough to know how hard it is(relatively speaking) to program. You might not have the same situation, but surely you can teach your boss the value of 100 lines of clean well-commented code. Rather than be secretive about what I do, I attempt to teach my coworkers as much about computing as I possibly can. Its not like they are going to learn your job - you've spent years studying and training to get where you are. So the effect of teaching your bosses and coworkers is that they respect what you do rather than view your job suspiciously.
Let's get this straight now, in England it's possible to get weapons for personal use if you're a criminal.
Let's get something else straight. In England, since they passed their anti-gun laws, gun crimes against civilians has risen. Dramatically.
Only criminals use guns in crimes, and they will use them whether there are laws against guns or not. Thats the definition of being a criminal. Only in England they know their victims are likely to be unarmed. Not much to stop them there. Here in the U.S. thugs have to think twice before pulling a weapon, because in millions of cases each year, law-abiding citizens with guns have stopped the transmission of crimes.
were given rights to buy RHAT stock at the IPO, making them all quite a boodle of cash
How do you figure? Red Hat's IPO was at $14, now it sits at $5.97. The stock hasn't split, so by my calculations those "lucky" open source developers so priveleged to buy RHAT have lost more than half their money.
Then, as more and more fish were being swept ashore by the violent waves, they gradually learned to adapt by growing feet and learning to breathe through their noses. That's how the first reptiles appeared, and all above ground non-plant life originated from these reptiles. Even the birds. Penguins are great examples of the creatures who haven't evolved far enough to develop working wings.
Your ancestors were monkeys, their ancestors were reptiles, their ancestors were fish and their ancestors were single-celled organisms. Deal with it, monkey-breath.
Hey, we'll say anything to take God out of the picture!
So who out there is an audiophile and listens to compressed streams of music?
Lately I've been finding all I can download off P2P programs like Direct Connect and Furthurnet. Its mostly live shows, and they are all in.shn format, which is a lossless compression format that restores to the original.wav file.
These communities shun both compressed files like.mp3 and trading anything that has been released commercially. What you do get is great recordings of live music from bands like U2, DMB, Grateful Dead, etc., all ethically traded and in their full audio glory.
The audiophiles I know pretty much don't listen to mp3, ever.
Furthermore, if you can't read perl, its probably because you can't read regular expressions, and if you don't know regexes, your programming knowledge is incomplete.
Funny, its these same people that claim the market for programmers is so bad.
Because of the faltering economy, people aren't buying the latest computers and gee-whiz gadgets en masse. However, it was the high-tech toys and software that were the driving force behind the last economic boom.
I also see analogies between the computer industry and the auto industry when it developed. At sometime back in the auto's history, probably the 40's or 50's, cars could already travel as fast as most people would ever want to drive. That didn't stop the industry from improving, and I don't think it will stop the computer industry either. We'll start concentrating on safety(security) and design factors, making software safer, easier, and more fun to drive.
But first, economically we somehow need to get out of this funk. As long as what we make is an extra that people can do without(and it always will be that) people won't buy in economically hard times.
Americans have a per capita of $36,000(as of 2000), about $10,000 more than the next highest industrialized nation. The manufacturing jobs have been largely replaced by professional jobs - also more Americans have the opportunity to go to college now than ever.
Really, would you want to spend your life working in a factory? I thought not. If you think the economy was better in the 70's I suggest its you thats been smoking something.
In our society, at one time, and perhaps once again someday, goverment serves the needs of the PEOPLE, and not the corporations that dominate donations and fund raising.
What mythical time was this? What country? Which corporations??
How about the United States, circa 1776? Early corporations were to serve the interests of the people, they all had a charter, and if they stepped outside their bounds they were slapped hard by the feds. See here for some more details.
By allowing corporate power to grow out of control we have allowed ourselves to revert from democracy to feudalism.
Well for one thing, the packet filter has a feature that turns away Code Red(and similar malformed data/buffer overflow attacks) before they can harm your precious Windows machine.
In all likelyhood, an OpenBSD firewall will protect Windows machines from vulnerabilites that have yet to be exploited.
I don't think that you understand what capitalism actually is.
Calling pure capitalism short-sighted isn't a bad assesment IMO.
If capitalism is so great, why do all our technological advances come from government spending?
If capitalism provides the fairest return for our dollars and our labor, then how do you explain this? Am I somehow implicitly giving my OK for $BIG_CORP to spend millions of dollars on PACs?
Nope, the parent poster is right. Capitalism is deeply flawed, luckily we have a system in the U.S. that allows government to correct these flaws, and if more people would get out and vote we could have better control over these corrections.
I place my trust in democracy far more so than capitalism. For instance the PAC's. On a democratic level we can tell our government to stop playing favorites to rich contributors. But can we, through our "spending power" tell the corporations to stop spending money on PACs? Not a chance.
But I will say, now when I drive down the road I think about how easy it would be to drive(or walk) right in front of someone, get out, pull them out of their car, and take off with it.
Not that I would do such a thing, its just something I never thought of before.
ah, but you contradict yourself. If I didn't know what libertarianism was, then how did I(correctly) identify you as a libertarian without you saying so specifically?
What "screwed up my thinking" was learning the concept of interdependence. Also realizing that the free market left unrestrained by govt. produces some pretty horrific things - like monopolies and slave labor(or close to it).
Libertarianism is short-sighted because consistently acting only in your self-interest is short sighted. As a philosophy it doesn't realize that caring for the weaker members of society strenghtens the society as a whole. Or if it does it assumes that families and churches should be the ones responsible and ignores the fact that families and churches are no longer the stable cohesive units they once were.
Additionally libertarianism advocates the privatization of what really should be public services - roads, electricity, gas, etc. Witness the debacle in California last summer as an example of what deregulation can cause.
Of course India's free market is better than what they had before, but there is still a lot of government oversight and taxation in that country.
jeez...all would be well if you could just live in libertopia, now wouldn't it?
I recognize the speech and the attitude(oh the horror! we are forced to pay taxes at gunpoint to support the lazy indigents!) because I used to be a libertarian.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm surprised more people haven't mentioned this.
better !cry
better watchout
lpr why
santa claus <north pole > town
cat /etc/passwd >list
ncheck list
ncheck list
cat list | grep naughty >nogiftlist
cat list | grep nice >giftlist
santa claus <north pole > town
who |grep sleeping
who |grep awake
who |egrep "bad|good"
for (goodness sake) { be good }
I thought they were something specifically produced for this market, but after reading the article I think the RIAA has the right to go after these guys. Its one thing to make copies for personal use, but entirely another to mass produce and sell them in a convenience store chain.
If the new service was an academic thing, not for profit, I would lend my processor cycles to be able to use it. But in the case of running part of Google, I'd like a royalty for my part in contributing to Googles bottom line.
In fact I think you might be onto an idea that someone will eventually implement. Google's backend is spread out amongst 10,000 PC-class machines. Each of those machines "earns" $100 for every million Google brings in. So a royalty would be fair and if you paid one, you could easily find enough people out there willing to do it in order to make it feasible.
Would google be an ideal grid computing idea? Would you donate disk space / processor cycles to run distributed google?
A.
1. Yes, it would.
2. Only if I got paid.
An honest, armed citizen will not point a gun at you unless he intends to use it. Therefore, for your purposes, when you see someone pointing a gun at you, rather than concern yourself whether they are a thug or an honest citizen, my advice would be to either to duck, run, or start negotiating.
Furthermore, the same people who would be interested in these solutions are the ones who are going to balk when they are told that in order to implement these solutions, they have to rip out all their Cobol code and replace it with something else, replace any EDI they are doing with XML, and ditch any old tech they have in use like their modems, dot-matrix printers, etc. I'm not holding my breath.
The real problem for IT is that our management and coworkers don't understand what we do. My solution is to offer to educate these people as much as possible. I'm lucky enough to have a manager who has dabbled in Perl enough to know how hard it is(relatively speaking) to program. You might not have the same situation, but surely you can teach your boss the value of 100 lines of clean well-commented code. Rather than be secretive about what I do, I attempt to teach my coworkers as much about computing as I possibly can. Its not like they are going to learn your job - you've spent years studying and training to get where you are. So the effect of teaching your bosses and coworkers is that they respect what you do rather than view your job suspiciously.
Let's get something else straight. In England, since they passed their anti-gun laws, gun crimes against civilians has risen. Dramatically.
Only criminals use guns in crimes, and they will use them whether there are laws against guns or not. Thats the definition of being a criminal. Only in England they know their victims are likely to be unarmed. Not much to stop them there. Here in the U.S. thugs have to think twice before pulling a weapon, because in millions of cases each year, law-abiding citizens with guns have stopped the transmission of crimes.
How do you figure? Red Hat's IPO was at $14, now it sits at $5.97. The stock hasn't split, so by my calculations those "lucky" open source developers so priveleged to buy RHAT have lost more than half their money.
Its such a big place, yet for you, there's no room for God. The possibilites are endless. Well, endless minus one in your case.
Your ancestors were monkeys, their ancestors were reptiles, their ancestors were fish and their ancestors were single-celled organisms. Deal with it, monkey-breath.
Hey, we'll say anything to take God out of the picture!
Lately I've been finding all I can download off P2P programs like Direct Connect and Furthurnet. Its mostly live shows, and they are all in .shn format, which is a lossless compression format that restores to the original .wav file.
These communities shun both compressed files like .mp3 and trading anything that has been released commercially. What you do get is great recordings of live music from bands like U2, DMB, Grateful Dead, etc., all ethically traded and in their full audio glory.
The audiophiles I know pretty much don't listen to mp3, ever.
Funny, its these same people that claim the market for programmers is so bad.
I also see analogies between the computer industry and the auto industry when it developed. At sometime back in the auto's history, probably the 40's or 50's, cars could already travel as fast as most people would ever want to drive. That didn't stop the industry from improving, and I don't think it will stop the computer industry either. We'll start concentrating on safety(security) and design factors, making software safer, easier, and more fun to drive.
But first, economically we somehow need to get out of this funk. As long as what we make is an extra that people can do without(and it always will be that) people won't buy in economically hard times.
Really, would you want to spend your life working in a factory? I thought not. If you think the economy was better in the 70's I suggest its you thats been smoking something.
What mythical time was this? What country? Which corporations??
How about the United States, circa 1776? Early corporations were to serve the interests of the people, they all had a charter, and if they stepped outside their bounds they were slapped hard by the feds. See here for some more details.
By allowing corporate power to grow out of control we have allowed ourselves to revert from democracy to feudalism.
Beg to differ. Here in the world of books, "izbin" is the common pronunciation - saying "eye-ess-bee-enn" confirms you to be a newbie.
Well for one thing, the packet filter has a feature that turns away Code Red(and similar malformed data/buffer overflow attacks) before they can harm your precious Windows machine.
In all likelyhood, an OpenBSD firewall will protect Windows machines from vulnerabilites that have yet to be exploited.
Clearly, they should have used Cobol.NET.
Calling pure capitalism short-sighted isn't a bad assesment IMO.
If capitalism is so great, why do all our technological advances come from government spending?
If capitalism provides the fairest return for our dollars and our labor, then how do you explain this? Am I somehow implicitly giving my OK for $BIG_CORP to spend millions of dollars on PACs?
Nope, the parent poster is right. Capitalism is deeply flawed, luckily we have a system in the U.S. that allows government to correct these flaws, and if more people would get out and vote we could have better control over these corrections.
I place my trust in democracy far more so than capitalism. For instance the PAC's. On a democratic level we can tell our government to stop playing favorites to rich contributors. But can we, through our "spending power" tell the corporations to stop spending money on PACs? Not a chance.
Not that I would do such a thing, its just something I never thought of before.
that truly gives new meaning to the phrase "Bastard Operator From Hell"
Perhaps not worth a lawsuit, but if Google is going to be arbitrary about how they rank sites it at least makes their page ranking less valuable.
What "screwed up my thinking" was learning the concept of interdependence. Also realizing that the free market left unrestrained by govt. produces some pretty horrific things - like monopolies and slave labor(or close to it).
Libertarianism is short-sighted because consistently acting only in your self-interest is short sighted. As a philosophy it doesn't realize that caring for the weaker members of society strenghtens the society as a whole. Or if it does it assumes that families and churches should be the ones responsible and ignores the fact that families and churches are no longer the stable cohesive units they once were.
Additionally libertarianism advocates the privatization of what really should be public services - roads, electricity, gas, etc. Witness the debacle in California last summer as an example of what deregulation can cause.
Of course India's free market is better than what they had before, but there is still a lot of government oversight and taxation in that country.
I recognize the speech and the attitude(oh the horror! we are forced to pay taxes at gunpoint to support the lazy indigents!) because I used to be a libertarian.
And then, I turned 15.