Actually you don't know what you're talking about here. Microsoft isn't a large user of the patent system. Considering their size they have realtively few patents.
While it is true that Microsoft has taken an interest in filing some rather onerous patents as of late. I would note that we've yet to see an litigation from these patents. Past history has show us that Microsoft's use of patents have been defensive, not offensive.
In fact several times Microsoft has been the violator of a patent and actually ended up loosing.
Stop making Microsoft the enemy in fronts where they aren't. IPIX are the people that are using patents for offensive warafare, not Microsoft.
A lot of people have commented that this doesn't make much sense, for various reasons. Essentially the biggest argument has been that it's not technically possible to do this for arbitrarily located systems.
However, in most cases you buy a circut from a telco (e.g. USWest) which is then connected to an ISP. You can buy the circut from the telco without setting it up to connect to anything and it would be useless. In this way bandwidth can be seperated from where it travels much as electricity is not the wire it travels across.
Many ISPs maintain much bigger circuts with telco's than what they are actually using in bandwidth at any given time. And many maintain lines to multiple backbone providers (e.g. UUNet, Sprint, etc...).
As such bandwidth could be shifted from one backbone provider or additional service added as desired. Obviously the technology isn't ideal because it can't be done automatically based off a commodity market that knows how much delivering a given packet will cost in monetary amounts. But it can be done on a much more crude hand basis.
This isn't going to be useful for smaller companies or even individuals. But that's not the point. Just as smaller companies and individuals don't go to Enron to purchase their electricity for their houses, nor would they purchase bandwidth.
It's still early on in this idea and it's still developing but the idea does make sense and it is possible.
The real issue is who's to say that Python's white space use is correct? If you suggest that, I guess we should adopt specific typefaces for all the books, since surely you can come up with a correct typeface.
Different styles for different folks, as long as you pick one and stick with it, who cares.
It WILL work. The idea is to let the memory hogging httpd processes that are producing the dynamic content to exit out as quickly as possible. Then let squid which doesn't use as much memory pump out the data...
This design would obviously improve the delivery of the static content more than the dynamic content. But that doesn't mean that the memory usage etc... wouldn't decrease for dynamic content.
While I'm not sure what type of overhead squid takes per process... But my Apache processes normally chew about 5MB or RAM per connection. Assuming that squid uses 1MB overhead and you have another 1MB of content that has to be put in memory while it's being sent out that would only mean that you're chewing 2MB per process. Assuming that all the content was pulling that 1MB page (which we know it isn't) you would be able to server 250% (or 2.5 times) more connections than you would with the same amount of RAM. That's a pretty good...
Slashdot policy on KDE suscks so bad!
on
Quickies a go-go
·
· Score: 1
I don't see what's so amazing about these screenshots. It's just another screenshot. Sheesh.
A better system would be to make the charges incremental. So, you'd pay $20 for one domain name, $30 for the second, $40 for the third, etc. Somebody who's just registering a few names can soak the extra cost but speculators would go broke registering even dozens.
What type of braindead idea is that? Just because you own more than one domain doesn't mean you're a sepculator. I suggest you do a whois and see just how many domains someone like say Microsoft owns. You'll note that Internic returns the first 50 and gives up. Second, this will make a mess of the database. Nobody will use consistent NIC handles because they won't want to be owning more than one domain. And the organization fields will have the same sort of thing happen.
This is why we should support free sites that offer free content (like/.).
This has got to be one of the most clueless statements about/. I've seen. Slashdot is as free as Altavista is. And they both have ads. (in fact I'm looking at a nice VA research ad as I type this in). So what the heck are you blabering about?
Word97 Files are *NOT* RTF files. Word will write RTF files but the RTF files aren't what we are talking about.
Your own post even shows how clueless you are: RTF files created in Word 6.0 (and later) for the Macintosh and Power Macintosh have a file type of "RTF."
I agree with you. Even if they find the author it is unlikely this will stand up in court. This ID is not like the Pentium III id that cannot be removed or changed.
Fact of that matter is that back when all the big fuss about all this came out I wrote a program to remove them and/or replace them. Whomever wrote Melissa could have easily used my program, Guideon to replace the IDs.
For that matter they could have done it by hand with a simle hex editor. It would be all too ironic for one hacker to frame another, but it's hard to believe that he/she would not be following this GUID issue.
So in order for it to stand up in court there's going to need to be some other evidence to prove that this individual really did it.
While I like the rest of them would like to see virus writters brought to justice, we *CANNOT* convict people on easily falsified evidence alone.
Unless he signed something that said he couldn't write a decoder I don't see the problem.
Just because he saw the AMP code before he wrote his doesn't mean he didn't write the code. Heck that's like saying that the Delorian is a rip off of a GM car because the guy who made it used to work for them and obviously saw car designs while he worked there.
I guess if we want to follow what you said Linux would be theft from the BSD guys too. I won't believe you (and I hope no one else does too) if you say that Linus never saw any of the BSD source, or for that matter any of the contributors either.
According to Play Media's web site the only company that their CEO is said to have worked at is US West.
And the people who actually write the software don't even say who they've worked for, don't you think they'd be making a big deal if they'd worked at MCA or BMG?
I've seen a fair amount of improvement in WinAmp. While I can't tell if they're still using Amp, I really don't think they're that dumb to have given credit at first and then to have pulled the credit out later.
Beyond that it's not like this data is even irreplaceable. I mean jeez a list of songs on CDs. If someone made a free server someone would pick it up and the community would as usual contribute the data.
While this doesn't mean that we'll see CDDB die overnight, it would die eventually.
'strings' a word file - bigger privacy problem.
on
Windows ID
·
· Score: 1
Don't think that Microsoft is the only one that has this problem. It's created by people simply not clearing memory before they use it.
I've seen cases of unused segments in Macintosh Resource forks having extraneous data that most people probably wouldn't want getting sent out.
So this isn't something that is unique to Microsoft. If anything the lack of programmers doing memset is probably one of biggest privacy issues around now. Thing is nobody has really said anything about it.
Funny! M$ will die in court, by its own hand.
on
Windows ID
·
· Score: 1
I'm sure you could buy the Evergreen Point Floating Bridge for cheap. At least the state probably would be willing to sell it. Odd thing is that Microsoft is right off 520 which is the road the bridge services. For more info look at any of these links:
Slashdot Mirror
Actually you don't know what you're talking about here. Microsoft isn't a large user of the patent system. Considering their size they have realtively few patents.
While it is true that Microsoft has taken an interest in filing some rather onerous patents as of late. I would note that we've yet to see an litigation from these patents. Past history has show us that Microsoft's use of patents have been defensive, not offensive.
In fact several times Microsoft has been the violator of a patent and actually ended up loosing.
Stop making Microsoft the enemy in fronts where they aren't. IPIX are the people that are using patents for offensive warafare, not Microsoft.
Definately not a new idea. Seattle Internet Exchange does this very thing.
A lot of people have commented that this doesn't make much sense, for various reasons. Essentially the biggest argument has been that it's not technically possible to do this for arbitrarily located systems.
However, in most cases you buy a circut from a telco (e.g. USWest) which is then connected to an ISP. You can buy the circut from the telco without setting it up to connect to anything and it would be useless. In this way bandwidth can be seperated from where it travels much as electricity is not the wire it travels across.
Many ISPs maintain much bigger circuts with telco's than what they are actually using in bandwidth at any given time. And many maintain lines to multiple backbone providers (e.g. UUNet, Sprint, etc...).
As such bandwidth could be shifted from one backbone provider or additional service added as desired. Obviously the technology isn't ideal because it can't be done automatically based off a commodity market that knows how much delivering a given packet will cost in monetary amounts. But it can be done on a much more crude hand basis.
This isn't going to be useful for smaller companies or even individuals. But that's not the point. Just as smaller companies and individuals don't go to Enron to purchase their electricity for their houses, nor would they purchase bandwidth.
It's still early on in this idea and it's still developing but the idea does make sense and it is possible.
The real issue is who's to say that Python's white space use is correct? If you suggest that, I guess we should adopt specific typefaces for all the books, since surely you can come up with a correct typeface.
Different styles for different folks, as long as you pick one and stick with it, who cares.
I find this really hard to believe but CNET is doing spamdexing.
It WILL work. The idea is to let the memory hogging httpd processes that are producing the dynamic content to exit out as quickly as possible. Then let squid which doesn't use as much memory pump out the data...
This design would obviously improve the delivery of the static content more than the dynamic content. But that doesn't mean that the memory usage etc... wouldn't decrease for dynamic content.
While I'm not sure what type of overhead squid takes per process... But my Apache processes normally chew about 5MB or RAM per connection. Assuming that squid uses 1MB overhead and you have another 1MB of content that has to be put in memory while it's being sent out that would only mean that you're chewing 2MB per process. Assuming that all the content was pulling that 1MB page (which we know it isn't) you would be able to server 250% (or 2.5 times) more connections than you would with the same amount of RAM. That's a pretty good...
I don't see what's so amazing about these screenshots. It's just another screenshot. Sheesh.
What type of braindead idea is that? Just because you own more than one domain doesn't mean you're a sepculator. I suggest you do a whois and see just how many domains someone like say Microsoft owns. You'll note that Internic returns the first 50 and gives up. Second, this will make a mess of the database. Nobody will use consistent NIC handles because they won't want to be owning more than one domain. And the organization fields will have the same sort of thing happen.
This has got to be one of the most clueless statements about /. I've seen. Slashdot is as free as Altavista is. And they both have ads. (in fact I'm looking at a nice VA research ad as I type this in). So what the heck are you blabering about?
Umm I was standing in a CompUSA staring at one yesterday. It was practically hidden in the back. But it was there.
If you do a search "open source" only turns up only when you do a search that shows pending marks.
Your own post even shows how clueless you are: RTF files created in Word 6.0 (and later) for the Macintosh and Power Macintosh have a file type of "RTF."
Versus what we're talking of as a .doc.
Fact of that matter is that back when all the big fuss about all this came out I wrote a program to remove them and/or replace them. Whomever wrote Melissa could have easily used my program, Guideon to replace the IDs.
For that matter they could have done it by hand with a simle hex editor. It would be all too ironic for one hacker to frame another, but it's hard to believe that he/she would not be following this GUID issue.
So in order for it to stand up in court there's going to need to be some other evidence to prove that this individual really did it.
While I like the rest of them would like to see virus writters brought to justice, we *CANNOT* convict people on easily falsified evidence alone.
I can see both sides of this...
BUT it's not our Katz wasn't clear.
As the reader it's not our problem to resolve Katz's ambiguity, rather it was his problem.
Unless he signed something that said he couldn't write a decoder I don't see the problem.
Just because he saw the AMP code before he wrote his doesn't mean he didn't write the code. Heck that's like saying that the Delorian is a rip off of a GM car because the guy who made it used to work for them and obviously saw car designs while he worked there.
I guess if we want to follow what you said Linux would be theft from the BSD guys too. I won't believe you (and I hope no one else does too) if you say that Linus never saw any of the BSD source, or for that matter any of the contributors either.
Umm where did you get that idea?
According to Play Media's web site the only company that their CEO is said to have worked at is US West.
And the people who actually write the software don't even say who they've worked for, don't you think they'd be making a big deal if they'd worked at MCA or BMG?
Yeah the amount is ludicrious.
I've seen a fair amount of improvement in WinAmp. While I can't tell if they're still using Amp, I really don't think they're that dumb to have given credit at first and then to have pulled the credit out later.
I think the original poster is being rather presumptious to believe that he knows slashdot is making it worse.
If there really was an upgrade going on it probably has nothing to do with us looking things up.
NSI doesn't have to apply to become a register. They're going to seperate their business into two divisions:
a) Running root name servers and the back end whois database, as well as maintaining the authoritative zone files.
b) Selling and processing registrations.
New registrars will buy the things in (a) from Internic at the same rate that they sell it to their (b) unit.
So don't think that Internic is going to go away.
While this doesn't mean that we'll see CDDB die overnight, it would die eventually.
Don't think that Microsoft is the only one that has this problem. It's created by people simply not clearing memory before they use it.
I've seen cases of unused segments in Macintosh Resource forks having extraneous data that most people probably wouldn't want getting sent out.
So this isn't something that is unique to Microsoft. If anything the lack of programmers doing memset is probably one of biggest privacy issues around now. Thing is nobody has really said anything about it.
A history of the Evergreen Point floating bridge
Is the broken-down 520 bridge on last its legs?
Old span, new urgency
520 bridge reopens after costly shutdown
520 bridge may close more often as lower wind threshold considered
One step closer to 520 solution
People seem to keep asking so I'll post a top level so it's really easy to find.
You can find the original CNet article and links to various other items at:
http://www.traya.net
FYI I DO NOT work for or have any affiliation to Apple.