Some of the main advantages of IPv6 over IPv4 are:
quality of service
simplified headers
multicasting
security (that's certainly buzzword compliant, why is it never brought up?)
autoconfiguration
improved routing
authentication
Of these, only "simplified headers" really applies to IPv6 over IPv4. (Although I confess to not knowing what "improved routing" refers to.) Yes, there is QoS for IPv4, and multicasting for IPv4, and IPSEC for IPv4, and Zeroconf, etc.
The real advantage of IPv6 is... more addresses! It is nice to be able to give each device a "real" addresss (meaning not behind a NAT) for any situation where you want your client to act like a server, the main use being P2P and games (as I see it). I think this is a compelling reason, actually, and eventually we will get IPv6. Why panic about the low level of interest?
Then again, I am in Amsterdam, and have a/48 of IPv6 addresses from my DSL provider.:)
Most people either download music, and/or see nothing wrong with it. The "extreme" that you mention is the norm.
It is not possible for every activity to result in somebody getting paid. Neither is this a reasonable goal.
There were no "content producers" for most of human history, yet people made music, works of art, and so on. It will be different, neither better nor worse, if the world returns to a state where people are not paid for making digital recordings.
Not all phenomena that cannot be falsified are necessarily supernatural.
As an example, consider that Belgians serve their beer in glasses designed to enhance their flavour. Presumably this is because the way the liquid warms up, and the way it makes your mouth change shape, and the way that the smell comes out through the neck, and so on. Each type of beer has its own glass, designed for that particular brand.
How can you test this scientifically? I don't think it can be done. You cannot ask someone to rate the test of differently shaped glasses without bias, because you cannot prevent them from knowing the shape of the glass that they are drinking out of.
OTOH, this does not necessarily mean that the shape of the glass has no effect. Nor does it mean that it is supernatural. Rather, it means that there are things that fall outside of science.
Solaris kicks Linux's arse on UltraSPARC hardware.
Does it? I had a hard time finding benchmarks newer than 2000 or so. But then, I guess that's when Linux started being good enough for enterprise computing.
We've got a couple of servers handling querys in a cluster:
Uptime: 10418160 Threads: 4 Questions: 2625533853 Slow queries: 3766 Opens: 737894304 Flush tables: 1 Open tables: 64 Queries per second avg: 252.015
Uptime: 12681405 Threads: 4 Questions: 2630532355 Slow queries: 1900 Opens: 749532935 Flush tables: 1 Open tables: 64 Queries per second avg: 207.432
We are very query-heavy, as you can see from our update server:
Uptime: 12139590 Threads: 5 Questions: 164806650 Slow queries: 3362 Opens: 17307356 Flush tables: 142 Open tables: 64 Queries per second avg: 13.576
The query servers get millions of queries per day, admittedly only thousands of updates (tens of thousands, but still). We have been using InnoDB for several years now, and have never had any problem with database corruption, etc.
I did do benchmarking of Postgres for the types of queries in our application several years ago, and found that it was 10 to 20 times slower than MySQL. That was using MyISAM tables, which were the best ones available at the time.
Before we converted to InnoDB we did benchmarking of MyISAM versus InnoDB, and discovered that for a single query InnoDB could be 3x slower than MyISAM. But for our server under peak loads it was only about 10% slower than MyISAM - and InnoDB removed a degenerate case where our entire server was blocked for minutes at a time.:-/
From what I can see, MySQL performs well, is straightforward to maintain, and has all the functionality we need (and then some). Converting to Postgres - or indeed any other SQL database - makes about as much sense for us as migrating from Linux to GNU Hurd.
I know I shouldn't complain, but why the fuck can't companies just put links to the videos? Even normally sane organisations like the BBC do this crap.
I hate feeling like an luser - I thought it was just Linux, but I have problems in Windows too.:(
But the point is there's no way, short of monitoring every moment of a child's internet usage (which isn't truly practical) to ensure they don't end up going there.
It's not about whether an adult wants to go there or not - it's about whether an adult has the means to ensure their children don't go there.
This can be done with whitelisting (children are only allowed to see specific web sites, and receive e-mail from specific addresses). Simple and effective.
No need for draconian laws or turning society into a kindergarden.
The 80286 was the first Intel CPU that had support for multitasking. By this, I mean that the processor would prevent programs from overwriting arbritrary memory locations. Plus several useful instructions to help this. And it could access more than 1 Mbyte of RAM (technically the 8086 and 8088 could do this, but only with cludges like EMS memory, which swapped memory into the accessible 1 Mbyte a page at a time, under direct control of the applications).
386 had math emulation.
This is a bit of an understatement, because the 80386 was the first 32-bit CPU from Intel. Also, it had support for running multiple "virtual" 8086 machines - fantastic stuff!
In my mind, the 80386 is when the PC became a "real" computer.
486 was better than 386;)
True. The biggest innovation of the 80486, IMHO, was that it included the equivalent of the earlier math co-processors (which cost hundreds of dollars) on the CPU. All of the tricks I'd learned to do integer math became obsolete overnight - and I was glad!
To be fair, the 80486 moved a lot of instructions that had been performed in microcode into hard-wired circuits. The majority of commonly-used instructions were now executed in one CPU cycle. In fact, with the 80486 a lot of earlier specialised instructions became obsolete.
Pentium is basically the 586.
The Pentium is, indeed, the 80586, but Intel was reacting to competitors making cheaper chips that implemented the same instruction set and selling them with the same name. The courts ruled that Intel couldn't trademark a number (486), so all future CPU's have names. Branding!
The Pentium didn't add that much in terms of features, but it did support a kind of super-scalar processing (meaning running more than 1 instruction per CPU cycle), in a very cumbersome and strange way, with one "pipeline" that could execute a limited subset of instructions in parallel with the other, main pipeline. This is the beginning of the end for hand-crafted assembly code as a way of life.
Pentium Pro isn't supposed to be good at multimedia, it's supposed to be a math processor, chunking out numbers like crazy, a lot like todays xeons..
The Pentium Pro was the bomb! Your summary does a huge disservice to this CPU.
The Pentium Pro was, in my mind, a work of genius. The folks at Intel did not ignore the results that the RISC folk were using. Instead they hit upon a way to get (most of) the advantages of RISC and maintain compatibility with the CISC instruction set. They broke the Intel instructions up into RISC-like instructions, and those were executed RISC-style by the processor, and then "retired" one CISC instruction at a time.
As others have mentioned, this allowed out-of-order instructions, multiple execution cores, and all of the goodness that we still rely on today.
Pentium II was the big one. MMX multimedia functions, out of order processing etc..
The Pentium II was just a Pentium Pro targeted at desktops rather than at servers. A good thing, mind you.
Of course, MMX was added, but in the first MMX instructions only had a very limited set of applications, and MMX had already been present on some of the earlier Pentium models.
Pentium III/IV are leaps and bounds of improvements and innovations from the it's predesessors.
The Pentium III is not a big improvement over the Pentium II, or indeed over the Pentium Pro! The MMX (or rather SSE) was improved again, and gave compiler writers better control over cache behaviour, which did result in impressive gains in certain applications.
The Pentium 4 is the first truly different architecture since the Pentium Pro - and Intel appears to be moving away from it towards the Pentium M-style chips (which are basically the Pentium Pro again, with emphasis on low power). The idea with the Pentium 4 was to have a very, very long pipeline to allow the processor to scale up to ridiculous speeds. It worked! But as Mac fanatics will be happy to tell you, processor performance is more than just high megahertz.
Later Pentium 4's had hyper-threading, which is cool, and indeed a bit of a departure, and will be present on all desktops soon enough. Yay!
I agree with that laws that erode freedoms are bad. My problem was with:
The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals.
Ayn Rand doesn't believe there is any valid role for government. I tried to merely point out that government does have influence other than "the power to crack down on criminals". I tried to pick one that is very hard to describe as bad.
(I believe government can do a lot to improve life, but that would distract from the point at hand, which is that Ayn Rand is basically a demagogue for literate people.)
"There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws." - Ayn Rand, "Atlas Shrugged"
Gosh, that's pretty stupid. We have laws that say which side of the road to drive on. It's a good thing. It makes driving possible. This is independent of whether they are "innocent men" or "criminals". Typical Ayn Rand though.
Yeah, I have some, namely the fact that the supposed supporters of states rights won't let a state decide how to run it's election.
This flip-flop on states rights has historical precedent. For instance, the southern states had a law passed in Congress in 1850 requiring that northern states return run-away slaves. Only after they lost control of the federal government did they become concerned about states rights, eventually using it as one of the rationales behind succession from the Union. (BTW, this "states rights" myth persists today in many forms as an attempt by Neo-Confederates to justify slavery.)
I'm not saying that the current administration has any ideologies similar to the southern slave-holders other than self-serving hypocrisy and a complete lack of compassion for human suffering, mind you.
Nonsense, Microsoft is a singular here in the UK too.
Except that in the UK people say, "Microsoft are coming out with a new version of Windows in 2005." It still jars my delicate American sensibilities whenever I listen to the BBC.
I am subjected to the British flavour of English every day, from the time I leave my flat and take the lift to my office, to when the cleaner comes to empty the bin and I return home to watch the telly with my bird. While some Americans think Britishish is brill, I still fancy American English.
Re:Just coal alone is enough
on
Out of Gas
·
· Score: 1
Repeat after me, Synthetic Fuel. It's made from coal. The technology is mature, Germans fought during WWII using it.
And we see how well that worked.
Perhaps we should have our troops stick points on the tops of their helmets because the Germans did that in WWI?
Interesting idea, I can't get to the website but a feature I'd want is the content shared P2P so you don't have to rely on a central server for the content.
When I go to the Gutenberg site and do a search, it gives me plain text, zipped plain text, and P2P links.
I don't know whether this makes you a genius for thinking of a good idea, or an idiot for not bothering to check to see if it had already been implemented.
The first is that Internet mail has retry functionality built in. If your mail server goes off-line for a few minutes, most clients won't notice. It's not an immediate service like HTTP. Personally, I only have a backup MX for my personal domain because my box is physically located at my employer's office. The company could unplug it (permanently!) at any moment. People I trust - companies not one iota.
The other thing is, as other people have mentioned, this service relies on embedded 1-byte images retrieved by mail clients using HTTP. In this case, if their HTTP servers are off-line, the service is basically non-functional. In this case, having the MX delivery fail may actually be a feature. If the MX fails at the same time as the web server, you avoid having mail delivered when it can't be tracked.
Incidentally, this side-effect of having related service failures is one reason I think that the DNS requirements of having DNS servers available in multiple networks is probably bogus for many services. For a lot of companies, if you HTTP server is off line, why would you care that DNS is working? Why would you spend any time or money making your DNS more reliable than your web service? (My guess is that DNS weenies consider reliable DNS an end, rather than a means.)
Which means an annual increase of 5.5% or so - above inflation but not earth-shattering by any means, especially considering California's financial troubles and increasing conservativism.
We upgraded our Slackware-derived desktop to a "new" Slackware-derived desktop at work about 1 year ago. As someone who uses an ancient Linux desktop every day, I assure you that Linux has changed greatly.
For instance, I can get neither OpenOffice nor Mr. Project installed by the ops group, both of which could be of immediate use to my group.
Slashdot Mirror
It's just FUD. Probably from IPv6 fan-boys.
But don't take it from me. Take it from the guy who runs the organisation that gives out addresses to India and China.
Of these, only "simplified headers" really applies to IPv6 over IPv4. (Although I confess to not knowing what "improved routing" refers to.) Yes, there is QoS for IPv4, and multicasting for IPv4, and IPSEC for IPv4, and Zeroconf, etc.
The real advantage of IPv6 is... more addresses! It is nice to be able to give each device a "real" addresss (meaning not behind a NAT) for any situation where you want your client to act like a server, the main use being P2P and games (as I see it). I think this is a compelling reason, actually, and eventually we will get IPv6. Why panic about the low level of interest?
Then again, I am in Amsterdam, and have a
Most people either download music, and/or see nothing wrong with it. The "extreme" that you mention is the norm.
It is not possible for every activity to result in somebody getting paid. Neither is this a reasonable goal.
There were no "content producers" for most of human history, yet people made music, works of art, and so on. It will be different, neither better nor worse, if the world returns to a state where people are not paid for making digital recordings.
Can't we all just agree that the Wikipedia knows all things?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal
This might not work. According to The Music of the Primes Rivest (the 'R' in RSA) threw away the prime numbers in one of the RSA challenges.
Not all phenomena that cannot be falsified are necessarily supernatural.
As an example, consider that Belgians serve their beer in glasses designed to enhance their flavour. Presumably this is because the way the liquid warms up, and the way it makes your mouth change shape, and the way that the smell comes out through the neck, and so on. Each type of beer has its own glass, designed for that particular brand.
How can you test this scientifically? I don't think it can be done. You cannot ask someone to rate the test of differently shaped glasses without bias, because you cannot prevent them from knowing the shape of the glass that they are drinking out of.
OTOH, this does not necessarily mean that the shape of the glass has no effect. Nor does it mean that it is supernatural. Rather, it means that there are things that fall outside of science.
Solaris kicks Linux's arse on UltraSPARC hardware.
Does it? I had a hard time finding benchmarks newer than 2000 or so. But then, I guess that's when Linux started being good enough for enterprise computing.
I did find something in the UltraLinux FAQ:
http://www.ultralinux.org/faq.html#q_1_10
We are very query-heavy, as you can see from our update server:
The query servers get millions of queries per day, admittedly only thousands of updates (tens of thousands, but still). We have been using InnoDB for several years now, and have never had any problem with database corruption, etc.
I did do benchmarking of Postgres for the types of queries in our application several years ago, and found that it was 10 to 20 times slower than MySQL. That was using MyISAM tables, which were the best ones available at the time.
Before we converted to InnoDB we did benchmarking of MyISAM versus InnoDB, and discovered that for a single query InnoDB could be 3x slower than MyISAM. But for our server under peak loads it was only about 10% slower than MyISAM - and InnoDB removed a degenerate case where our entire server was blocked for minutes at a time. :-/
From what I can see, MySQL performs well, is straightforward to maintain, and has all the functionality we need (and then some). Converting to Postgres - or indeed any other SQL database - makes about as much sense for us as migrating from Linux to GNU Hurd.
I know I shouldn't complain, but why the fuck can't companies just put links to the videos? Even normally sane organisations like the BBC do this crap.
:(
I hate feeling like an luser - I thought it was just Linux, but I have problems in Windows too.
But the point is there's no way, short of monitoring every moment of a child's internet usage (which isn't truly practical) to ensure they don't end up going there.
It's not about whether an adult wants to go there or not - it's about whether an adult has the means to ensure their children don't go there.
This can be done with whitelisting (children are only allowed to see specific web sites, and receive e-mail from specific addresses). Simple and effective.
No need for draconian laws or turning society into a kindergarden.
Honestly, I'd give up English in a second if there was some other language that the whole world would agree to speak.
I wish I had your linguistic skills! Or maybe you just mean you'd stop speaking English, if this happened, not that you would learn the new language.
The 80286 was the first Intel CPU that had support for multitasking. By this, I mean that the processor would prevent programs from overwriting arbritrary memory locations. Plus several useful instructions to help this. And it could access more than 1 Mbyte of RAM (technically the 8086 and 8088 could do this, but only with cludges like EMS memory, which swapped memory into the accessible 1 Mbyte a page at a time, under direct control of the applications).
386 had math emulation.
This is a bit of an understatement, because the 80386 was the first 32-bit CPU from Intel. Also, it had support for running multiple "virtual" 8086 machines - fantastic stuff!
In my mind, the 80386 is when the PC became a "real" computer.
486 was better than 386 ;)
True. The biggest innovation of the 80486, IMHO, was that it included the equivalent of the earlier math co-processors (which cost hundreds of dollars) on the CPU. All of the tricks I'd learned to do integer math became obsolete overnight - and I was glad!
To be fair, the 80486 moved a lot of instructions that had been performed in microcode into hard-wired circuits. The majority of commonly-used instructions were now executed in one CPU cycle. In fact, with the 80486 a lot of earlier specialised instructions became obsolete.
Pentium is basically the 586.
The Pentium is, indeed, the 80586, but Intel was reacting to competitors making cheaper chips that implemented the same instruction set and selling them with the same name. The courts ruled that Intel couldn't trademark a number (486), so all future CPU's have names. Branding!
The Pentium didn't add that much in terms of features, but it did support a kind of super-scalar processing (meaning running more than 1 instruction per CPU cycle), in a very cumbersome and strange way, with one "pipeline" that could execute a limited subset of instructions in parallel with the other, main pipeline. This is the beginning of the end for hand-crafted assembly code as a way of life.
Pentium Pro isn't supposed to be good at multimedia, it's supposed to be a math processor, chunking out numbers like crazy, a lot like todays xeons..
The Pentium Pro was the bomb! Your summary does a huge disservice to this CPU.
The Pentium Pro was, in my mind, a work of genius. The folks at Intel did not ignore the results that the RISC folk were using. Instead they hit upon a way to get (most of) the advantages of RISC and maintain compatibility with the CISC instruction set. They broke the Intel instructions up into RISC-like instructions, and those were executed RISC-style by the processor, and then "retired" one CISC instruction at a time.
As others have mentioned, this allowed out-of-order instructions, multiple execution cores, and all of the goodness that we still rely on today.
Pentium II was the big one. MMX multimedia functions, out of order processing etc ..
The Pentium II was just a Pentium Pro targeted at desktops rather than at servers. A good thing, mind you.
Of course, MMX was added, but in the first MMX instructions only had a very limited set of applications, and MMX had already been present on some of the earlier Pentium models.
Pentium III/IV are leaps and bounds of improvements and innovations from the it's predesessors.
The Pentium III is not a big improvement over the Pentium II, or indeed over the Pentium Pro! The MMX (or rather SSE) was improved again, and gave compiler writers better control over cache behaviour, which did result in impressive gains in certain applications.
The Pentium 4 is the first truly different architecture since the Pentium Pro - and Intel appears to be moving away from it towards the Pentium M-style chips (which are basically the Pentium Pro again, with emphasis on low power). The idea with the Pentium 4 was to have a very, very long pipeline to allow the processor to scale up to ridiculous speeds. It worked! But as Mac fanatics will be happy to tell you, processor performance is more than just high megahertz.
Later Pentium 4's had hyper-threading, which is cool, and indeed a bit of a departure, and will be present on all desktops soon enough. Yay!
I agree with that laws that erode freedoms are bad. My problem was with:
The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals.
Ayn Rand doesn't believe there is any valid role for government. I tried to merely point out that government does have influence other than "the power to crack down on criminals". I tried to pick one that is very hard to describe as bad.
(I believe government can do a lot to improve life, but that would distract from the point at hand, which is that Ayn Rand is basically a demagogue for literate people.)
"There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws."
- Ayn Rand, "Atlas Shrugged"
Gosh, that's pretty stupid. We have laws that say which side of the road to drive on. It's a good thing. It makes driving possible. This is independent of whether they are "innocent men" or "criminals". Typical Ayn Rand though.
This flip-flop on states rights has historical precedent. For instance, the southern states had a law passed in Congress in 1850 requiring that northern states return run-away slaves. Only after they lost control of the federal government did they become concerned about states rights, eventually using it as one of the rationales behind succession from the Union. (BTW, this "states rights" myth persists today in many forms as an attempt by Neo-Confederates to justify slavery.)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fugitive_Slave_Law_of _1850
I'm not saying that the current administration has any ideologies similar to the southern slave-holders other than self-serving hypocrisy and a complete lack of compassion for human suffering, mind you.
Nonsense, Microsoft is a singular here in the UK too.
Except that in the UK people say, "Microsoft are coming out with a new version of Windows in 2005." It still jars my delicate American sensibilities whenever I listen to the BBC.
I am subjected to the British flavour of English every day, from the time I leave my flat and take the lift to my office, to when the cleaner comes to empty the bin and I return home to watch the telly with my bird. While some Americans think Britishish is brill, I still fancy American English.
Repeat after me, Synthetic Fuel. It's made from coal. The technology is mature, Germans fought during WWII using it.
And we see how well that worked.
Perhaps we should have our troops stick points on the tops of their helmets because the Germans did that in WWI?
Interesting idea, I can't get to the website but a feature I'd want is the content shared P2P so you don't have to rely on a central server for the content.
When I go to the Gutenberg site and do a search, it gives me plain text, zipped plain text, and P2P links.
I don't know whether this makes you a genius for thinking of a good idea, or an idiot for not bothering to check to see if it had already been implemented.
Two things about fallback mail servers.
The first is that Internet mail has retry functionality built in. If your mail server goes off-line for a few minutes, most clients won't notice. It's not an immediate service like HTTP. Personally, I only have a backup MX for my personal domain because my box is physically located at my employer's office. The company could unplug it (permanently!) at any moment. People I trust - companies not one iota.
The other thing is, as other people have mentioned, this service relies on embedded 1-byte images retrieved by mail clients using HTTP. In this case, if their HTTP servers are off-line, the service is basically non-functional. In this case, having the MX delivery fail may actually be a feature. If the MX fails at the same time as the web server, you avoid having mail delivered when it can't be tracked.
Incidentally, this side-effect of having related service failures is one reason I think that the DNS requirements of having DNS servers available in multiple networks is probably bogus for many services. For a lot of companies, if you HTTP server is off line, why would you care that DNS is working? Why would you spend any time or money making your DNS more reliable than your web service? (My guess is that DNS weenies consider reliable DNS an end, rather than a means.)
Which means an annual increase of 5.5% or so - above inflation but not earth-shattering by any means, especially considering California's financial troubles and increasing conservativism.
We upgraded our Slackware-derived desktop to a "new" Slackware-derived desktop at work about 1 year ago. As someone who uses an ancient Linux desktop every day, I assure you that Linux has changed greatly.
For instance, I can get neither OpenOffice nor Mr. Project installed by the ops group, both of which could be of immediate use to my group.
KDE? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
Every person I've ever met that used an Amiga said they were perfect in every way.
Are you sure that you could slow the system down? Maybe you were using some hard-core mind-altering drugs back then....
There's a word for trying the same thing and expecting different results.
Gambling?
My ISP, xs4all, gives me an IPv6 /48 as part of my basic ADSL.
Or isn't that what you meant?
In Europe the caller pays. It's a Good Thing(tm).
The only trick in America would be that there would ahve to be some way to alert the caller to the type of charges they are about to incur.