T1 (campuscommonsapts.com), at any rate the audio on Real Player couldn't be much worse... (maybe beat by some 4khz java internet radio applet I've heard) and the video for quicktime is just as good (and you can resize the thing)...
Windows media ran mysteriously well, but the fscking drivers for my video card messed up all media player videos (jail bars, Diamond Stealth 2k)...
GGI does look impressive... I was amazed how fast a windowed ggi doom ran (doom legacy compared to lxdoom)... kind of like (don't hit me) DirectX for linux.
Hey, just get Mesa, GGI, GII, and a 3d audio standard (GAI?) built into your standard distribution and Linux will kick ass on the desktop/gaming end of things.
After that just a little tweaking on Wine and linux will be a bit of nice packaging away from being a masterful competitor in desktop land... (ie ppl who know nothing about computers will be using linux)
Good thing he posted as AC, not many ppl would want to get all the flame mail from criticizing Linus.
Since you're so big on logic... Isn't it sad that when someone says "that's a bad attitude" the first response was "well Mr. Authority said it!" and that's supposed to be a valid argument?
A management mistake is just that; no matter who makes it. Management may not be #1 but it matters.
I doubt very much that most/. readers have enough background to make the judgement that the ISDN ppl are or are not "futzing around" but from what's been presented isn't it about time that they synch their schedule up with the next kernel?
Hard drives and HD controllers allready have a mediocre amount of cache. Why not Increase the amount of cache massively? A large amount of ram dedicated to the task of caching reads/writes for the HD might increase performance significantly.
Take your average 20G SCSI drive and slap on 2G of ram. 1G can mirror recently accessed files, possibly guessing what the computer will need next. The other gig can act as a write buffer. Perhaps dynamically decide how much should be read and how much should be write buffer based on recent performance. Things would slow down if there was too much data throughput, but you can get more ram to balance out your massive permanent storage.
With the execution path of a modern CPU increasing as it is and with a few tweaks of the linux scheduler it may be possible to more efficiently manage disk reads and writes. Those 500k cycles can be saved for something that isn't stuck on a missed page.
No, this doesn't solve the problem but it is a good transition to massive ram disks. As ram prices fall and HD sizes increase I think we can see a more intelligenly scheduled data pipelines and multiple RAID arrays that will both allow for terrebytes of storage and gigabytes of bandwidth. Now you just have to worry about making it cheap.
It seems to reactonary and knee-jerk ignorant at first glance. It reminds me of my dad who can't end a conversation with me without using the phrase "hippy-dippie" at least once.
Many of his points seem to espouse an ignorance of the current state of things. His overall point that "open-sores" technology is perpetually beta and full of bugs as opposed to windows (which is of course perfect) is quite far from the truth.
When Win2K comes around I will at home still use linux most of the time. I may try out W2K at work and after the second or third service pack venture into that dark hole. We will not use W2K at my office unless Microsoft give my department at WSU a site license (as they did for win95). I have allready begun investigating Linux/Be/BSD as alternatives and there are currently a few computers on my floor running those OS's.
This prediction has very little impact on me, and I doubt it will come to pass.
The important thing to stress is that science, mysticism, philosophy, etc. are only models of the "reality" we observe. We too often mistake our models of reality for that which they describe. This misperception has been described as "The map is not the territory," or "The menu is not the meal."
Nicely put... there are also the "brains in a vat" and "what's under your nuttshell?" problems that force us to define our reality not in terms of an absolute "truth" but as a subset of our perceptions. Therefore the subjective truth of any "thing" is in its perception. Where a computer or the internet may be well defined in terms of its technological aspects, the practical accomplishments that it makes are not and are sometimes incredible enough to be described as "magick".
from the parent: Davis does an excellent job exploring the roots of our present technological society in the alchemical secret societes of the Middle Ages, and the present day raise in paganism amongst technologists.
IMHO this is an excellent thesis that is near the foundation of TechnoPaganism. It and several other ideas that expunged and I have explored are steadily coming together on our TechnoPaganism site. Quite a bit of this content manifests itself earlier in newsgroups (alt.techno-shamanism and the like) and we're hoping to start an open list serv.
Part of my admiration for this sort of thing is that it's totally decentrallized. Noone has really made a definitive claim to be the originator or leader of TechnoPaganism (with maybe one exception aside: I liked his previous website better). There are a few authors of TechnoPagan content, but no deffinative scripture (allthough this artice is quoted enough to be close, mirrored here if wired is too slow). So we're trying to take a more anthropological than phillosophical approach to this (as such we've separated our personal beliefs from general TechnoPaganism).
With that regard I'd like to invite anyone that has any sort of interest in this to join a discussion on it and possibly help write a FAQ or two (TechnoShamanism, may cover a wider social/cultural community).... hmmm I'm really tempted to try and archive this discussion.
DISCLAIMER: Please realize that we're not trying to "get" anything from this but hightened spirituality. This is on my PC which is not exactly a monstrous web server and my HTML skills are not as devistatingly awesome as some. Consider all material contained therein GPL'ed.
i386-unknown-openbsd2.5: 11 hr 27 min i686-pc-linux-gnu-gnulibc2.1: 12 hr 06 min
Why I'm considering playing with openBSD on my next box (their security features look good too)
(back on topic) By the way... at first I was wondering about this sort of thing as a benchmark...
of course some data might be more empty than other spots... but since we're all seeing the same jan 7/8 data there goes that problem... and
at first I thought the time index was "CPU time" ie the same thing you see in ps or top (and wintop)... anyways it's an interesting comparison but i'm not convinced it's a perfect benchmark...
hmmm, "queer" and "fag" are generally considered only appropriate to use if you ARE in fact homosexual, even Allies are discouraged from infringing on the "ownership of language" (trust me on this one, i know).
Simmilarly the `n-word` is another much stronger example of the "ownership of language" by a minority... it's origins (negro) aren't that offensive either...
heck, we're a minority... so why not... deem it RUDE and INSULTING to be called a hacker, unless by another hacker...
it sounds good to me, but "code dork" might be more accurate...
IMHO dork would refer to a wider community of the computer obsessed... video gamers, irc addicts... webaholics, and more specifically those who abhorr real life for said pleasures...
I'm using the RH 6.0 distro with WM and wanted to use gmc as my desktop/file manager but it seems to produce a memory leak... of course it might be the 2.2 kernel compiled with pgcc, but the only time i notice all my shared mem dissappear is when running gmc (after 8 hiours or so...)
..because I have a sinking feeling that AOL is going to monkey with it privacy-wise.
so what has AOL done to ICQ?
have the gone lawsuit happy against all the free ICQ clones? have you seen any AOL spam via ICQ? (well there is spam from spoofed UIN's but that's more likely from the free ICQ clients!)
at first I was afraid that I'd see the mandatory AD-space in the next version of ICQ...
but hey, that doesn't make sense!
if AOL was smart... they'd leave all these free things alone... free web browser... free music player... free message sender...
everyone LOVES FREE STUFF!!! so if AOL is the sole owner of all the free stuff that everyone loves than they can make it happily play allong with their own proprietary software...
there are so many free mp3 players and ICQ and AIM clones and replacements out there (not to mention mozilla) that if AOL ever tried to convert any of this stuff to a proprietary product they'd have horrendous competition....
I may be a little too optimistic but it isn't totally inconcievable that AOL will free up the lisences of winamp and ICQ (after they plug the security holes)
every step AOL takes in the non-proprietary direction is a step closer to the mindshare that has traditionally found AOL abhorrent (and made it the laughing stock of the internet)
if AOL decides to take this path I think it can be good for all parties involved...
The point isn't that Jon Katz, author, is getting linked all over the Web. The point is that the articles he wrote are getting linked all over the Web.
What is a person? Is he molecules or the sum total thereof? Or is he the total of that and his actions attitudes and effects that he has on the universe?
[engage flamage]
You are what you post. and likewise when your post is linked it is a link to YOU...
Don't even pretend that when one of your comments is moderated up you don't get a little ego trip... OF COURSE you do... i'm sure everyone does...
if YOU didn't care about moderator points then you would post as AC! and likewise if JON didn't care about "being linked all over the place" then he would have posted this to USENET!
oh, it's all about getting your due... Jon Katz has made that perfectly clear. In fact he wrote a WIRED article but posted it on slashdot. WHY? Maybe Wired wouldn't post it!!!
Now Jon, does that hurt? If it does you're nothing but EGO. If not then I have seriously misjudged you.
As the numerous posts quoting the jargon file has probably allready exhibbited, you should start putting more thought and research into what your write instead of just churning out a flashy newsbite because people are going to link it!
A hacker is also somebody who programs enthustically or obsessively, rather than just theorizes about programming. ... (Crackers) don't buy computer games, but they get online anyway, managing to get their hands on registration access codes. ... No crackers steal...hackers don't..That's sort of the point OGL
Care to blurr the line a bit more?
Seriously tho... romanticizing crackers will get you nowhere. There is a world where little kids log on to BBS's and download Doom 2 a month before its release allongside 'boxes.txt' and 'qcrack.zip'. This is the world of the cracker.
There is another world where bright young semiprofessionals figure out that encryption algorythm, or how to build their own tellephone, or how to get ahold of some id beta tester's computer. This is the world of the hacker.
One creates the exploits, but is too noble to use them. The others use the exploits, but are too ignorant to make their own.
You would expect that one would move from one world to the other. I would hope this happens when they turn 18 (when juvinile records wonderfully dissipate), but there are some crackers that refuse to grow up.
They do have common traits. Crackers wants to be hackers so why not emulate your heroes? Cusade for justice and a free copy of Quake 3! Smash online censorship and mailbomb that governor who proposed the dumb anti-porn (i mean anti-free speech) law!
When do the hackers grow up? When they figure out it's cooler to code up a constructive piece of software than to distribute 'papasmurf.c' to a zillion script kiddies. Then they are programmers.
We need less blurring of the lines here. We don't need to call programmers hackers and hackers crackers and romanticize all three. We need to learn that positive contribution to the community means a kernel bugfix, not redistributing a film, song, or game that cost some honest professional spent part of his life creating.
I agree with his defense of the channel and offered to post a "press-release" for the channel allong with all the info that is there. (at andross.dhs.org)
Suffice it to say that hacking exists. To look one way when a friend does it is one thing, but to abide it in your home or channel is dangerous. Like that friend who smokes pot in your car; if he gets caught you could lose your car.
I hope that #pascal will tighten down on "hackers" and recover accordingly.
Perhaps recompiling everything with egcs & pgcc etc etc... sure there might not be much original work, but at least they took the time to optomize and merge their work with RH 6.0
I say that's worth a blank CD-R...
I'm almost tempted... but well, I want to learn how to use my box, rather than just play with it...
Slashdot Mirror
appearing with his hair straight and a cheezy goatee he looks too much like me... (find my pic on one of my sites if you really care to know how much)
T1 (campuscommonsapts.com), at any rate the audio on Real Player couldn't be much worse... (maybe beat by some 4khz java internet radio applet I've heard) and the video for quicktime is just as good (and you can resize the thing)...
Windows media ran mysteriously well, but the fscking drivers for my video card messed up all media player videos (jail bars, Diamond Stealth 2k)...
GGI does look impressive... I was amazed how fast a windowed ggi doom ran (doom legacy compared to lxdoom)... kind of like (don't hit me) DirectX for linux.
Hey, just get Mesa, GGI, GII, and a 3d audio standard (GAI?) built into your standard distribution and Linux will kick ass on the desktop/gaming end of things.
After that just a little tweaking on Wine and linux will be a bit of nice packaging away from being a masterful competitor in desktop land...
(ie ppl who know nothing about computers will be using linux)
Good thing he posted as AC, not many ppl would want to get all the flame mail from criticizing Linus.
/. readers have enough background to make the judgement that the ISDN ppl are or are not "futzing around" but from what's been presented isn't it about time that they synch their schedule up with the next kernel?
Since you're so big on logic... Isn't it sad that when someone says "that's a bad attitude" the first response was "well Mr. Authority said it!" and that's supposed to be a valid argument?
A management mistake is just that; no matter who makes it. Management may not be #1 but it matters.
I doubt very much that most
Hard drives and HD controllers allready have a mediocre amount of cache. Why not Increase the amount of cache massively? A large amount of ram dedicated to the task of caching reads/writes for the HD might increase performance significantly.
Take your average 20G SCSI drive and slap on 2G of ram. 1G can mirror recently accessed files, possibly guessing what the computer will need next. The other gig can act as a write buffer. Perhaps dynamically decide how much should be read and how much should be write buffer based on recent performance. Things would slow down if there was too much data throughput, but you can get more ram to balance out your massive permanent storage.
With the execution path of a modern CPU increasing as it is and with a few tweaks of the linux scheduler it may be possible to more efficiently manage disk reads and writes. Those 500k cycles can be saved for something that isn't stuck on a missed page.
No, this doesn't solve the problem but it is a good transition to massive ram disks. As ram prices fall and HD sizes increase I think we can see a more intelligenly scheduled data pipelines and multiple RAID arrays that will both allow for terrebytes of storage and gigabytes of bandwidth. Now you just have to worry about making it cheap.
It seems to reactonary and knee-jerk ignorant at first glance. It reminds me of my dad who can't end a conversation with me without using the phrase "hippy-dippie" at least once.
Many of his points seem to espouse an ignorance of the current state of things. His overall point that "open-sores" technology is perpetually beta and full of bugs as opposed to windows (which is of course perfect) is quite far from the truth.
When Win2K comes around I will at home still use linux most of the time. I may try out W2K at work and after the second or third service pack venture into that dark hole. We will not use W2K at my office unless Microsoft give my department at WSU a site license (as they did for win95). I have allready begun investigating Linux/Be/BSD as alternatives and there are currently a few computers on my floor running those OS's.
This prediction has very little impact on me, and I doubt it will come to pass.
The important thing to stress is that science, mysticism, philosophy, etc. are only models of the "reality" we observe. We too often mistake our models of reality for that which they describe. This misperception has been described as "The map is not the territory," or "The menu is not the meal."
... hmmm I'm really tempted to try and archive this discussion.
Nicely put... there are also the "brains in a vat" and "what's under your nuttshell?" problems that force us to define our reality not in terms of an absolute "truth" but as a subset of our perceptions. Therefore the subjective truth of any "thing" is in its perception. Where a computer or the internet may be well defined in terms of its technological aspects, the practical accomplishments that it makes are not and are sometimes incredible enough to be described as "magick".
from the parent:
Davis does an excellent job exploring the roots of our present technological society in the alchemical secret societes of the Middle Ages, and the present day raise in paganism amongst technologists.
IMHO this is an excellent thesis that is near the foundation of TechnoPaganism. It and several other ideas that expunged and I have explored are steadily coming together on our TechnoPaganism site. Quite a bit of this content manifests itself earlier in newsgroups (alt.techno-shamanism and the like) and we're hoping to start an open list serv.
Part of my admiration for this sort of thing is that it's totally decentrallized. Noone has really made a definitive claim to be the originator or leader of TechnoPaganism (with maybe one exception aside: I liked his previous website better). There are a few authors of TechnoPagan content, but no deffinative scripture (allthough this artice is quoted enough to be close, mirrored here if wired is too slow). So we're trying to take a more anthropological than phillosophical approach to this (as such we've separated our personal beliefs from general TechnoPaganism).
With that regard I'd like to invite anyone that has any sort of interest in this to join a discussion on it and possibly help write a FAQ or two (TechnoShamanism, may cover a wider social/cultural community).
DISCLAIMER: Please realize that we're not trying to "get" anything from this but hightened spirituality. This is on my PC which is not exactly a monstrous web server and my HTML skills are not as devistatingly awesome as some. Consider all material contained therein GPL'ed.
i386-unknown-openbsd2.5: 11 hr 27 min
i686-pc-linux-gnu-gnulibc2.1: 12 hr 06 min
Why I'm considering playing with openBSD on my next box (their security features look good too)
(back on topic) By the way... at first I was wondering about this sort of thing as a benchmark...
of course some data might be more empty than other spots... but since we're all seeing the same jan 7/8 data there goes that problem... and
at first I thought the time index was "CPU time" ie the same thing you see in ps or top (and wintop)... anyways it's an interesting comparison but i'm not convinced it's a perfect benchmark...
Hell, on who's bill are you running up the load of 35 UltraSparcs?... ahhh rescinded... if they're not yours I hope you get away with it! ;->
just what would I do with that many spare boxes?
Hell... I'd Beowulf em and maybe start my AI research idea...
or... Beowulf seti?
too bad no source... wondering about a beowulf SETI@home client, could it be more efficient?
hmmm, "queer" and "fag" are generally considered only appropriate to use if you ARE in fact homosexual, even Allies are discouraged from infringing on the "ownership of language" (trust me on this one, i know).
;->
Simmilarly the `n-word` is another much stronger example of the "ownership of language" by a minority... it's origins (negro) aren't that offensive either...
heck, we're a minority... so why not... deem it RUDE and INSULTING to be called a hacker, unless by another hacker...
good luck pulling it off tho
kludge is a bit obscure... I've heard all of the comp sci professors here talk about 'hacking' in the negative sense (a quick sloppy bit of code)
jedi hacker, samuri programmer, computer mentat, code warrior, etc etc...
they're ok... but wayyyy to romanticized for me...
it sounds good to me, but "code dork" might be more accurate...
/. "News for _NERDS_"
IMHO dork would refer to a wider community of the computer obsessed... video gamers, irc addicts... webaholics, and more specifically those who abhorr real life for said pleasures...
then again... why is
hmmm...
I'm using the RH 6.0 distro with WM and wanted to use gmc as my desktop/file manager but it seems to produce a memory leak... of course it might be the 2.2 kernel compiled with pgcc, but the only time i notice all my shared mem dissappear is when running gmc (after 8 hiours or so...)
If that's your opinion, why not just steal food just like you're stealing software?
A fallacy if I ever saw one...
let's see: food is not given away with an option to pay later... shareware is
Shareware is a completely different paradigm from the common market and there is little room for comparing the two.
at worst the exploitation of shareware is the classic "tragidy of the commons"
oh, but since you're so morally superior this matters not to you...
Doesn't it feel nice to pass out blame? I'll come asking you who to blame the next time Microsoft buys out a good product.
Smart move if your hypothesis is true...
there are so many free mp3 players and...
therefore players like NaD that are just a little bit under par (comparitively) would probably overshadow winamp if it were crippled...
sure, if I didn't have to pay my tuition (as I do) I probably would splurge for the $10 registration...
Wait till $10 doesn't look like an appetizing dinner for two and then I'll pay it...
and it will do you no good to whine about moral obligations... this is a morally relative world, especially when it comes to the marketplace...
Let's see... formula for attention...
take one bit sensitive audience
one bit insulting/disparaging sentiment
mix well....
INSTANT ATTENTION!
Bryan Warner did it and became Marilyn Manson... now Jon Katz did it and is becoming the suit formerly known as Jon...
..because I have a sinking feeling that AOL is going to monkey with it privacy-wise.
so what has AOL done to ICQ?
have the gone lawsuit happy against all the free ICQ clones? have you seen any AOL spam via ICQ? (well there is spam from spoofed UIN's but that's more likely from the free ICQ clients!)
at first I was afraid that I'd see the mandatory AD-space in the next version of ICQ...
but hey, that doesn't make sense!
if AOL was smart... they'd leave all these free things alone... free web browser... free music player... free message sender...
everyone LOVES FREE STUFF!!! so if AOL is the sole owner of all the free stuff that everyone loves than they can make it happily play allong with their own proprietary software...
there are so many free mp3 players and ICQ and AIM clones and replacements out there (not to mention mozilla) that if AOL ever tried to convert any of this stuff to a proprietary product they'd have horrendous competition....
I may be a little too optimistic but it isn't totally inconcievable that AOL will free up the lisences of winamp and ICQ (after they plug the security holes)
let's see... buying netscape (mozilla)... getting ICQ... BSD rumors... next winamp....
every step AOL takes in the non-proprietary direction is a step closer to the mindshare that has traditionally found AOL abhorrent (and made it the laughing stock of the internet)
if AOL decides to take this path I think it can be good for all parties involved...
The point isn't that Jon Katz, author, is getting linked all over the Web. The point is that the articles he wrote are getting linked all over the Web.
What is a person? Is he molecules or the sum total thereof? Or is he the total of that and his actions attitudes and effects that he has on the universe?
[engage flamage]
You are what you post. and likewise when your post is linked it is a link to YOU...
Don't even pretend that when one of your comments is moderated up you don't get a little ego trip... OF COURSE you do... i'm sure everyone does...
if YOU didn't care about moderator points then you would post as AC! and likewise if JON didn't care about "being linked all over the place" then he would have posted this to USENET!
oh, it's all about getting your due... Jon Katz has made that perfectly clear. In fact he wrote a WIRED article but posted it on slashdot. WHY? Maybe Wired wouldn't post it!!!
Now Jon, does that hurt? If it does you're nothing but EGO. If not then I have seriously misjudged you.
As the numerous posts quoting the jargon file has probably allready exhibbited, you should start putting more thought and research into what your write instead of just churning out a flashy newsbite because people are going to link it!
[disengage flamage]
sorry, forgot to preview... forgot my pw
(Crackers) don't buy computer games, but they get online anyway, managing to get their hands on registration access codes.
No crackers steal...hackers don't..That's sort of the point OGL
Care to blurr the line a bit more?
Seriously tho... romanticizing crackers will get you nowhere. There is a world where little kids log on to BBS's and download Doom 2 a month before its release allongside 'boxes.txt' and 'qcrack.zip'. This is the world of the cracker.
There is another world where bright young semiprofessionals figure out that encryption algorythm, or how to build their own tellephone, or how to get ahold of some id beta tester's computer. This is the world of the hacker.
One creates the exploits, but is too noble to use them. The others use the exploits, but are too ignorant to make their own.
You would expect that one would move from one world to the other. I would hope this happens when they turn 18 (when juvinile records wonderfully dissipate), but there are some crackers that refuse to grow up.
They do have common traits. Crackers wants to be hackers so why not emulate your heroes? Cusade for justice and a free copy of Quake 3! Smash online censorship and mailbomb that governor who proposed the dumb anti-porn (i mean anti-free speech) law!
When do the hackers grow up? When they figure out it's cooler to code up a constructive piece of software than to distribute 'papasmurf.c' to a zillion script kiddies. Then they are programmers.
We need less blurring of the lines here. We don't need to call programmers hackers and hackers crackers and romanticize all three. We need to learn that positive contribution to the community means a kernel bugfix, not redistributing a film, song, or game that cost some honest professional spent part of his life creating.
test
from (andross@andross.dhs.org)
Chatted with amadeus on this...
I agree with his defense of the channel and offered to post a "press-release" for the channel allong with all the info that is there. (at andross.dhs.org)
Suffice it to say that hacking exists. To look one way when a friend does it is one thing, but to abide it in your home or channel is dangerous. Like that friend who smokes pot in your car; if he gets caught you could lose your car.
I hope that #pascal will tighten down on "hackers" and recover accordingly.
Perhaps recompiling everything with egcs & pgcc etc etc... sure there might not be much original work, but at least they took the time to optomize and merge their work with RH 6.0
I say that's worth a blank CD-R...
I'm almost tempted... but well, I want to learn how to use my box, rather than just play with it...
(compiling kernels is fun... really!)