NAT is actually solves a secondary problem: allowing individuals to have their own home network without having to register each of their computers with some sort of central authority. Almost all IPv6 advocates say that NAT won't be supported as part of the protocol, which is not such a bad thing if you see NAT simplay as a solution to solves address space issue, but it isn't if you see it as a solution allowing individuals to allocate their own addresses, without having to go through the bureaucratic process of registering each one. I feel that in missing this fact is actually a real issue and one that needs to be dealt with - if there already is a solution to this, then no one I have asked has yet provided me with one.
IPv6 needs to be seen as a long term solution and not try to solve an immediate problem. The way I see it is if you see something is running the chance of breaking then you really want to have a solution before it breaks. This is like the Y2K issue, which ended up being a non-issue simply because everyone had the foresight to fix the problem before Y2K occurred. You can argue that nothing broke because there wasn't really an issue, but at the same time you can argue that nothing broke because the problems had been solved before it was an issue.
Earth was apparently created in seven days. Not entirely impossible, if you consider that maybe earth was not a reference point then. Time is meant to be slowing down and who is to say that we aren't talking Martian days, Jovian days, or even a galaxian day?
The problem is always down to literal interpretation. I have always seen books such as the Bible and the Koran as guides, which should not be taken at face value. They might not be 100% right, but then again they also probably represent the simplification of facts, to help guide a populous that wouldn't have understood the details (just watch the news today to see this in action). Unfortunately simplification sometimes means some of the important facts are lost to time. I would rather keep an open mind about the possibilities, rather than trying to choose a camp, based on a poor basis of facts.
Just look at the "DVD features" to see what you get:
* Available Subtitles: English
* Available Audio Tracks: English (Dolby Digital 5.1)
* Star Trek The Original Series: The Complete Seasons 1-3
* Star Trek The Next Generation: The Complete Seasons 1-7
* Star Trek Deep Space Nine: The Complete Seasons 1-7
* Star Trek Voyager: The Complete Seasons 1-7
* Star Trek Enterprise: The Complete Seasons 1-4
* The 10 Star Trek feature films in two-disc special editions
* Commentary by director Robert Wise, special photographic effects director Douglas Trumbull, special photographic effects supervisor John Dykstra, music composer Jerry Goldsmith, and actor Stephen Collins on Star Trek: The Motion Picture
* The newly restored, director's edition of Star Trek: The Motion Picture
* Commentary by director Nicholas Meyer on Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
* Extended 116-minute director's edition of Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
* Commentary by director Leonard Nimoy, writer-producer Harve Bennett, director of photography Charles Correll, and actor Robin Curtis on Star Trek III: The Search for Spock
* Commentary by Leonard Nimoy and William Shatner on Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home
* Commentary by director/actor William Shatner and his daughter, Liz Shatner, on Star Trek V: The Final Frontier
* Commentary by director Nicholas Meyer and screenwriter Denny Martin Flinn on Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country
* Commentary by Brannon Braga and Ron Moore on Star Trek Generations
* Commentary by director-actor Jonathan Frakes on Star Trek First Contact
* Commentary by screenwriters Brannon Braga and Ronald D. Moore on Star Trek First Contact
* Commentary by producer Rick Berman on Star Trek Nemesis
* Commentary by director Stuart Baird on Star Trek Nemesis
* Text commentary by Michael Okuda and Denise Okuda (co-authors of The Star Trek Encyclopedia)
* New and vintage interviews, documentaries, and featurettes
* Deleted scenes
* Storyboard archives
* Trailers
Oops, looks like I didn't check what I had written. I should have been:
This is why a prefer the "insurance company" approach: we WON'T fine you for leaving your door unlocked, but we won't pay up if it is unlocked and you get unlawful entry either.
Remember you can walk into most buildings, but once you see the sign "authorized personnel only", have a need of a key (electronic or otherwise), or an employee of the building indicating you can not pass you know that this is where you stop, unless you have business being in the building, legitimate or otherwise.
It is like fining somebody for leaving their door unlocked and they get burglarized.
This is why a prefer the "insurance company" approach: we fine you for leaving your door unlocked, but we won't pay up if it is unlocked. Basically if you have anything worth locking up, then at least a basic lock indicates that you care. With no lock means, you don't care.
It would be much cheaper to tell people that they are responsible for their own basic security. Open Wi-Fi should be treated a public space, whereas closed Wi-Fi should be enought indication that you shouldn't be there. The way I see it, anything accessible with a certain amount of ease, with what is already installed on a computer (short of using unauthorized accounts), should be treated as being ok for all.
Should mention something that surprised me the other day: the ATI card that a friend bought for his PC, was marked as Mac compatible. Up to now it was always a separate card for the Mac or fudging around with firmwars hacks.
Something like OpenGL would probably benefit more from a consortium of interested companies, than any one company owning it. OpenGL is not a technology implementation, it is a technology specification, which everyone is free to implement in any which way they please, as long as it adheres to the specification. While I am a big fan of Open Source, I don't see limiting OpenGL to this philosophy a wise idea, since there are many valid closed source and open source solutions. The next best thing to a consortium would be a foundation, for managing the future of the specification.
Quite honestly I would like to see SGI reinvent themselves, since they have potential, but its just not being realised. Maybe they need someone akin to Steve Jobs to come in and do what the current management is not willing to do, or doesn't realise needs to be done?
SGI made some great machines both in the form of the hardware and the looks of the hardware. They also provided us with the likes of OpenGL.
The problem is that the market they once had, being high-end graphics workstations, is being eaten up by cheap MS-Windows based systems. They could try redefining themselves, but I not sure what form it could take. While their version of Unix had some nice additions, it was never really a selling point. Their cheapest systems start off at $9000, which more expensive than Apple, and they also have less technology diversity than a company like IBM to help buffer any slow growth of their hardware. Maybe if they offered a very capable $4000 machine, it might help them attract people who might have never considered them before?
BTW CATIA, which is a very important piece of CAD-CAM software in the automotive and aeronautical industry is actually Windows centric, so they benefits of a SGI machine there is zero.
Just downloaded the source code and noticed that it was written in C# of all languages. I suppose it wouldn't have been any better had it been written in Objective-C. Looks like if we want a true multi-platform version, then we need need to port it to a true multi-platform language, such as C/++ or Java (propriety, but has VMs on most platforms).
It may just be easier to work out the architecture and just do a rewrite.
I think it would be cool if the functionality of the two was merged. Just imagine have finished looking at our solar system, being able to come back to Earth and zoom into your house:)
First I would be curious to know why Windows supports hiding of files in such a way? Secondly would it be better for everyone if this sort of file hiding was removed from windows all together?
Have you ever felt uncomfortable diving through the bargin bin? I know that there is stuff in there that is sometimes worth getting, but you oftern feel like you are diving only to find the whole bin is filled with stuff you wouldn't want to buy anyhow.
What would tempt me is if you could buy the film for $1 on an iTunes like site and then get redirected to somewhere that would allow you to buy a better quality version in DVD form.
How long someone makes a one click Poddify* application. I imagine an FFMPEG based application where you simply could drag and drop any movie and it creates a suitable Video iPod file. The idea is that you would have nothing to tweak and it would do all the magic of deciding the right settings for you.
Sometimes when an experiment doesn't go as hoped, its Creator must guide the results intelligently.
Actually that sounds about right, especially from my experience at secondary school (aka High School). If you do a lab experiment, do something wrong and write up the results as you observed then you actually get a bad mark on your write-up. This actually encourages people to fudge the write-up and make it as the teacher expects. This is where I would like to see write-ups marked independently of the experimentation, to give more value to the procedure and observations, no matter how wrong the results mighte be. Maybe also encouraging the students to explain why they think the results differed from the expected results, to help make up for any experiemental errors.
We learn from our mistakes as well as others, but if we chuck them into trash then no one stands to learn from them.
That amount of data was impossible to analyze, so Microsoft focused on the three most-active spamming days, when 470,00 connection requests were made of the PC, and about 1.8 million messages were sent through it.
How nice: they allowed 18M junk messages to go through, but could be bothered to look at only 10% of the data. Unbelievable.
Do you want the job of analyzing all 18 million messages? If they are only analyzing 10% its probably because they figure that the other 90% probably have the same source. Even if the other 90% don't, sure you would want them to start somewhere, than put off affirmative action for a few years? One way of confirming whether the 90% do come from the same source is prosecuting the spammers responsible for the 10% and then dealing with the reduced amount of spam in the next cycle.
I must admit that I too quite like MS-Office on the Mac, though it just has two issues for me:
- forgetting what language the paragraph was in - I have an English system, but sometimes need to type in French
- the embedded picture issue that affects Word files created on the Mac, but viewed on the PC - see here The only thing that bothers me generally is closed or undocumented file formats, and Microsoft isn't the only culprit.
Ideas are always great, the practice is something else.
As mentioned in the article they are using is as a storage mechanism. While DVDs probably are big enough, they are also a lot more hassle to create quickly. In itself there isn't anything news worthy. They added the ability to save previews, that can be viewed on the iPod. While most people wouldn't want to do a detailed analysis, it is an easy way to see the obvious and even verify what you saved on your iPod. Plenty of other media devices could be used, but these guys are Mac developers, so they stick with what they know. Had they been MS-Windows developers, then they probably would have been using an iRiver device and MSN Messenger.
The tablet PC defeats the purpose of having a small portable device that you can take with you, and that tablet PC probably don't have the resolution need for displaying the images. iPods don't either, but you can easily plug them into a computer that does.
These guys are essentially trying to share news of their product. The fact that CNN gave them an article to do so is kudos to them.
Slashdot Mirror
NAT is actually solves a secondary problem: allowing individuals to have their own home network without having to register each of their computers with some sort of central authority. Almost all IPv6 advocates say that NAT won't be supported as part of the protocol, which is not such a bad thing if you see NAT simplay as a solution to solves address space issue, but it isn't if you see it as a solution allowing individuals to allocate their own addresses, without having to go through the bureaucratic process of registering each one. I feel that in missing this fact is actually a real issue and one that needs to be dealt with - if there already is a solution to this, then no one I have asked has yet provided me with one.
IPv6 needs to be seen as a long term solution and not try to solve an immediate problem. The way I see it is if you see something is running the chance of breaking then you really want to have a solution before it breaks. This is like the Y2K issue, which ended up being a non-issue simply because everyone had the foresight to fix the problem before Y2K occurred. You can argue that nothing broke because there wasn't really an issue, but at the same time you can argue that nothing broke because the problems had been solved before it was an issue.
If the following forum is anything to by, people are talking about it:
Linux 2.7 kernel
Even if it is not necessarily in active development, people are talking about what they would like to see.
Earth was apparently created in seven days. Not entirely impossible, if you consider that maybe earth was not a reference point then. Time is meant to be slowing down and who is to say that we aren't talking Martian days, Jovian days, or even a galaxian day?
The problem is always down to literal interpretation. I have always seen books such as the Bible and the Koran as guides, which should not be taken at face value. They might not be 100% right, but then again they also probably represent the simplification of facts, to help guide a populous that wouldn't have understood the details (just watch the news today to see this in action). Unfortunately simplification sometimes means some of the important facts are lost to time. I would rather keep an open mind about the possibilities, rather than trying to choose a camp, based on a poor basis of facts.
Just look at the "DVD features" to see what you get:
* Available Subtitles: English
* Available Audio Tracks: English (Dolby Digital 5.1)
* Star Trek The Original Series: The Complete Seasons 1-3
* Star Trek The Next Generation: The Complete Seasons 1-7
* Star Trek Deep Space Nine: The Complete Seasons 1-7
* Star Trek Voyager: The Complete Seasons 1-7
* Star Trek Enterprise: The Complete Seasons 1-4
* The 10 Star Trek feature films in two-disc special editions
* Commentary by director Robert Wise, special photographic effects director Douglas Trumbull, special photographic effects supervisor John Dykstra, music composer Jerry Goldsmith, and actor Stephen Collins on Star Trek: The Motion Picture
* The newly restored, director's edition of Star Trek: The Motion Picture
* Commentary by director Nicholas Meyer on Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
* Extended 116-minute director's edition of Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan
* Commentary by director Leonard Nimoy, writer-producer Harve Bennett, director of photography Charles Correll, and actor Robin Curtis on Star Trek III: The Search for Spock
* Commentary by Leonard Nimoy and William Shatner on Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home
* Commentary by director/actor William Shatner and his daughter, Liz Shatner, on Star Trek V: The Final Frontier
* Commentary by director Nicholas Meyer and screenwriter Denny Martin Flinn on Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country
* Commentary by Brannon Braga and Ron Moore on Star Trek Generations
* Commentary by director-actor Jonathan Frakes on Star Trek First Contact
* Commentary by screenwriters Brannon Braga and Ronald D. Moore on Star Trek First Contact
* Commentary by producer Rick Berman on Star Trek Nemesis
* Commentary by director Stuart Baird on Star Trek Nemesis
* Text commentary by Michael Okuda and Denise Okuda (co-authors of The Star Trek Encyclopedia)
* New and vintage interviews, documentaries, and featurettes
* Deleted scenes
* Storyboard archives
* Trailers
Take a look here: 1984 advert
with his heart set on making 2006 the next 1984.'
;)
Hmm, I wonder what Orwell would think about that.
Taken out of context I wonder whether that sounds like Homeland security and MPAA/RIAA being over zealous?
Oops, looks like I didn't check what I had written. I should have been:
This is why a prefer the "insurance company" approach: we WON'T fine you for leaving your door unlocked, but we won't pay up if it is unlocked and you get unlawful entry either.
Remember you can walk into most buildings, but once you see the sign "authorized personnel only", have a need of a key (electronic or otherwise), or an employee of the building indicating you can not pass you know that this is where you stop, unless you have business being in the building, legitimate or otherwise.
It is like fining somebody for leaving their door unlocked and they get burglarized.
This is why a prefer the "insurance company" approach: we fine you for leaving your door unlocked, but we won't pay up if it is unlocked. Basically if you have anything worth locking up, then at least a basic lock indicates that you care. With no lock means, you don't care.
It would be much cheaper to tell people that they are responsible for their own basic security. Open Wi-Fi should be treated a public space, whereas closed Wi-Fi should be enought indication that you shouldn't be there. The way I see it, anything accessible with a certain amount of ease, with what is already installed on a computer (short of using unauthorized accounts), should be treated as being ok for all.
Should mention something that surprised me the other day: the ATI card that a friend bought for his PC, was marked as Mac compatible. Up to now it was always a separate card for the Mac or fudging around with firmwars hacks.
As Eve once said to Adam: "Go on just one bite". The fruit is tempting, but then again they would never had tasted it had they not been in Eden.
:-/
What's my point? Um, I forgot
Something like OpenGL would probably benefit more from a consortium of interested companies, than any one company owning it. OpenGL is not a technology implementation, it is a technology specification, which everyone is free to implement in any which way they please, as long as it adheres to the specification. While I am a big fan of Open Source, I don't see limiting OpenGL to this philosophy a wise idea, since there are many valid closed source and open source solutions. The next best thing to a consortium would be a foundation, for managing the future of the specification.
Quite honestly I would like to see SGI reinvent themselves, since they have potential, but its just not being realised. Maybe they need someone akin to Steve Jobs to come in and do what the current management is not willing to do, or doesn't realise needs to be done?
SGI made some great machines both in the form of the hardware and the looks of the hardware. They also provided us with the likes of OpenGL.
The problem is that the market they once had, being high-end graphics workstations, is being eaten up by cheap MS-Windows based systems. They could try redefining themselves, but I not sure what form it could take. While their version of Unix had some nice additions, it was never really a selling point. Their cheapest systems start off at $9000, which more expensive than Apple, and they also have less technology diversity than a company like IBM to help buffer any slow growth of their hardware. Maybe if they offered a very capable $4000 machine, it might help them attract people who might have never considered them before?
BTW CATIA, which is a very important piece of CAD-CAM software in the automotive and aeronautical industry is actually Windows centric, so they benefits of a SGI machine there is zero.
Just downloaded the source code and noticed that it was written in C# of all languages. I suppose it wouldn't have been any better had it been written in Objective-C. Looks like if we want a true multi-platform version, then we need need to port it to a true multi-platform language, such as C/++ or Java (propriety, but has VMs on most platforms).
It may just be easier to work out the architecture and just do a rewrite.
I think it would be cool if the functionality of the two was merged. Just imagine have finished looking at our solar system, being able to come back to Earth and zoom into your house :)
Then they'll just hide it in an alternate stream somewhere.
They could, but I am surprised the OS allows this sort of behaviour. Do any Unix based systems allow something similar?
First I would be curious to know why Windows supports hiding of files in such a way? Secondly would it be better for everyone if this sort of file hiding was removed from windows all together?
Have you ever felt uncomfortable diving through the bargin bin? I know that there is stuff in there that is sometimes worth getting, but you oftern feel like you are diving only to find the whole bin is filled with stuff you wouldn't want to buy anyhow.
What would tempt me is if you could buy the film for $1 on an iTunes like site and then get redirected to somewhere that would allow you to buy a better quality version in DVD form.
How long someone makes a one click Poddify* application. I imagine an FFMPEG based application where you simply could drag and drop any movie and it creates a suitable Video iPod file. The idea is that you would have nothing to tweak and it would do all the magic of deciding the right settings for you.
*I reserve no rights on the name
Sometimes when an experiment doesn't go as hoped, its Creator must guide the results intelligently.
Actually that sounds about right, especially from my experience at secondary school (aka High School). If you do a lab experiment, do something wrong and write up the results as you observed then you actually get a bad mark on your write-up. This actually encourages people to fudge the write-up and make it as the teacher expects. This is where I would like to see write-ups marked independently of the experimentation, to give more value to the procedure and observations, no matter how wrong the results mighte be. Maybe also encouraging the students to explain why they think the results differed from the expected results, to help make up for any experiemental errors.
We learn from our mistakes as well as others, but if we chuck them into trash then no one stands to learn from them.
That amount of data was impossible to analyze, so Microsoft focused on the three most-active spamming days, when 470,00 connection requests were made of the PC, and about 1.8 million messages were sent through it.
How nice: they allowed 18M junk messages to go through, but could be bothered to look at only 10% of the data. Unbelievable.
Do you want the job of analyzing all 18 million messages? If they are only analyzing 10% its probably because they figure that the other 90% probably have the same source. Even if the other 90% don't, sure you would want them to start somewhere, than put off affirmative action for a few years? One way of confirming whether the 90% do come from the same source is prosecuting the spammers responsible for the 10% and then dealing with the reduced amount of spam in the next cycle.
Are you willing to say that you own code is 100% safe from the sort of issues that Microsoft encounters?
Hmm, maybe we can interview you next ;)
Since you are here I would be curious to know whether you plan to use OpenAL and OpenGL, or even libSDL for this?
I must admit that I too quite like MS-Office on the Mac, though it just has two issues for me:
- forgetting what language the paragraph was in - I have an English system, but sometimes need to type in French
- the embedded picture issue that affects Word files created on the Mac, but viewed on the PC - see here
The only thing that bothers me generally is closed or undocumented file formats, and Microsoft isn't the only culprit.
Ideas are always great, the practice is something else.
As mentioned in the article they are using is as a storage mechanism. While DVDs probably are big enough, they are also a lot more hassle to create quickly. In itself there isn't anything news worthy. They added the ability to save previews, that can be viewed on the iPod. While most people wouldn't want to do a detailed analysis, it is an easy way to see the obvious and even verify what you saved on your iPod. Plenty of other media devices could be used, but these guys are Mac developers, so they stick with what they know. Had they been MS-Windows developers, then they probably would have been using an iRiver device and MSN Messenger.
The tablet PC defeats the purpose of having a small portable device that you can take with you, and that tablet PC probably don't have the resolution need for displaying the images. iPods don't either, but you can easily plug them into a computer that does.
These guys are essentially trying to share news of their product. The fact that CNN gave them an article to do so is kudos to them.
Obligatory: What do if I have Linux or Windows?