How about requiring American corporations to keep their accounting computers in the US, where US laws can govern them? And while they're at it, how about Congress making some laws that actually stop Enrons, WorldComs and Andersons and their Kenny-boy Lay generation from robbing people?
I'm looking beyond the microchip at the nanochip swarm. A thousand chiplets, each containing just a few thousand programmable gates (like unbundled little FPGA clumps). Each signalling its state on an RF radio. With only a local clock, not a lockstep one wasting chiplet cycles. And a universal phased array for multichannel 1Gbps IO, 1TB Flash, 1Kdpi OLED and a holosonic projector.
How about if the phones just ship set to vibrate only, and people have to learn how to turn the ringer on? Make it simpler to turn the ringer on for a one-time ring on the next call, and just a little less simple to switch from vibrate to ring all the time. The dumber people who can't silence their phones when appropriate will be taken out, rather than me taking them out personally when they ruin a movie again.
A real innovation would be a mode that autoswitches the phone from ring to vibrate on a bluetooth signal. A good phone would authenticate the signal, requiring a senderID authenticated against a third-party DB. Maybe even autoswitch phones from ring to voicemail (or call forward). Then private spaces could control their environment, rather than rely on the politeness of the masses of unsophisticated phone users.
Not exactly, but we're discussing Blu-Ray discs that will not play on HDCP PCs, because of the DRM. It's only a matter of time before someone cracks that DRM. So I'm talking about the time centrally invested in stopping that vs the time spent my the masses overcoming it.
Yeah, until just one person out of the millions with PCs cracks an HDCP disc and uploads it. Is there any cost:benefit*risk analysis for this copy protection that isn't produced by the DRM industry and the CYA execs who promote it?
As I recall, the original Pentium (I) chip had 6 direct ports for direct CPU/CPU interconnect, forming cubic arrays (with PCI buses on the "surface"). Not only allowing scaling the CPU cycles, but also allowing tasks to "route around" unaccessible (crashed or broken) CPUs. Does the Linux kernel take advantage of such a CPU "network topology"?
Now that cores are going multiple, from double to quadruple, the next step could be octuple. That could offer a "cube" of processors in a single CPU, with similar redundancy/failover routing. Possibly addressable among the cubic CPU network. Is Linux able to exploit *that* kind of multiparallelism?
All this bullying research is just a lot of talk until it can answer the age-old question for the bully's target:
A: Fight back with everything you've got, even if you're certain to lose B: Get someone else to fight for you if you're certain they'll win C: Do what the bully makes you do D: Run away
In the event the bully targets you again, especially after C and/or D: E: Choose another option from A-D F: Lay a trap, even if it kills/maims the bully
And also whether making it through the initial confrontation in order to report the bully to an authority is wise.
All these tactics have up/downsides. We need research to analyze the bully. Preemptive jujitsu classes aren't enough, and being the bully has too much downside of its own.
That's the inevitable path of American culture: human rights replaced by corporate rights, and humans ourselves replaced by cartoons. We've already filled the Washington DC offices and the media stages, which institutionalize our culture, with two dimensional fictional characters. Tamagochi, though not as popular as in Japan, will surely bloom in online gaming. Eventually you'll get your Disney/Homeland Security mandatory offer to download your replacement.
Everyone stop fighting over whether humans have caused the current climate change. Those saying "NO" aren't going to change their minds, even as incremental new evidence adds to the substantial body already accepted by climatologists - or maybe they're right. It's not worth arguing about, because it's an abstract blame game.
What is worth arguing about is how to slow, stop or reverse the change obviously now underway. The same science used to fight the blame game is much better used to learn how reducing emissions and sinking carbon can mitigate the serious risk of climate change destroying our civilization. Past civilizations, like the Anasazi in the American Southwest and whatever you want to call the civilization that desertified the Sahara across to the Gobi in China, might not have had our advantage of science and engineering. So their change happened slower, but was more inevitable. Let's harness our climate science to create new climate engineering to cope with this climate change, whether it's manmade or as natural as the arrival of Winter.
Anyone out there using Oracle's OID to do LDAP, and their servlet container, in a single app? Anyone using OID + JBoss? Any idea how that app could be improved by integration inside Oracle?
Know any docs on switching existing LDAP/servlet installations to Oracle with OID, to prepare for Oracle's apparently increased servlet support?
"The Greatest Station in the Universe", New Orleans' WWOZ, not only survived Hurricane Katrina, but has been a lifeline to New Orleanians in exile. The public radio branch of the NO Jazzfest is supported mostly by subscriptions from the public. And for years, subscribers outside New Orleans have paid much more than residents for their Crescent City Connection.
Of course, Katrina did a lot of damage to WWOZ, also - including blowing away (literally) their local FM transmission antenna and gear. And of course the unpaid volunteers who broadcast the best music ever recorded (and live realtime performances) mostly lost everything in the storm, including CD collections they have to replace. WWOZ needs subscribers and listeners now more than ever - at any level, even $1 (or E1 etc). They were succeeding in exactly the kind of Internet Radio project we want most for well over a decade - "transmitting" by FTP even before streaming software was available, in a city which still lived in the 18th and 19th Centuries.
Google's not fighting for individual rights in that court case. Google's fighting for Google's rights, or, at its broadest, corporate rights. There's no issue of individual rights involved. So your pick of Google, and its nonsensical false choice against the EFF (why choose?), doesn't hold any weight earned by legal insight on your part. In fact, since the story we're discussing shows that Google's desktop search puts your privacy at serious risk, your sticking to them seems to have no merit at all, beyond your adorable belief in the power of a (nonbinding) corporate motto like "don't be evil".
This pricing is the result of a monopoly. At first it seems like movies on the home video rack represent a diversity of choices and alternatives - multiple movies, multiple distributors, all competing for your video dollar (euro/yen/peso - but probably not yuan;). But each movie is a unique item. With "exclusive distribution" deals, there's only one vendor of each unique item. The demand for competition, met only by piracy, is the biggest enemy of the MPAA - bringing with it customer-punishing exaggerated lawsuits.
Sure, most Hollywood movies are interchangeable in the same mass market. But somehow, they all cost the same, with huge profits and low risks. That is the fingerprint of either a monopoly, a cartel, or a price-fixing scheme.
Of course, movies are made by a single entity, a producer, so some monopoly is always inevitable. But like any other "invention", America's property laws accommodate that monopoly by allowing a limited time in which inventors can recoup their investment. That time has also been exploded into perpetuity, also by the MPAA. Who can blame them for going after a perpetual monopoly? But we can blame the people's representatives in Congress, who defy the people and the Constitution when they give the MPAA that unlimited empire.
Let the producers get a year, or 200% their dollar cost, or a second chance in any new medium under those same terms, in which to profit. After that, the limited temporary monopoly protection granted by the people to the inventors should expire. Even if we only get requirements for an open market for distributors with competitive bidding, it will be a useful "compromise".
All the surveillance is worth it, because we've caught all the terrorists! I feel safer knowing we've got all those Qaeda evildoers. I'm finally satisfied that we've caught Osama in our dragnet. And the byproduct, catching all the drug mafia, has really cleaned up the streets - and our nation's veins. So we've made some Quakers paranoid - they live to quake, right? And, in an unexpected bonus, the Republicans won't be taken by surprise by any Democratic Party dirty tricks. If only we'd let Emperor Nixon protect us, in his wisdom, we'd have all the oil we want, and terrorists would never have attacked us.
No, it's up to Linus. Developers can submit code under GPL3, or any other license. But it's up to Linus whether to include that code in his kernel source - if he accepts that incoming license, and abides by it, including the requirement that he release his new code with the inclusions under the new license. If Linus doesn't want to release a new kernel under GPL3, he can't include GPL3 code, and doesn't have to.
However, if the contributors insist on submitting code with GPL3, and Linus declines to accept it, there's some legal arguments to be resolved before deciding whether they can fork the kernel and release it under GPL3, with his code. It depends on whether GPL2 code can be released under GPL3. I wonder what Eben Moglen has to say about that. But even if it's OK, that's still not "Linux". Linus owns the trademark, and cannot allow a fork which dilutes his trademark with a different product - he'd lose the trademark.
What's so beautiful about the idea that females send unknowing new people into this cruel world, just so the mothers can leech off the stemcells? They keep the byproduct of the stemcell production around, first to help with chores, then to pose for exploitative pictures, and later to drive them to the senior club.
If Sun releases control over the project, that will make it more likely that an independent project will split OO.o into a server and AJAX clients. And that another project will cluster the OO.o server. Then Web forms and GUIs can finally have the kinds of editing control we deserve in the 21st Century. Like automatic version control. Or anything that beats these slate-like TEXTAREAs.
Hey, the NYTimes gets credit for publishing their story of Bush's domesting spying operation, even though they did so only to preempt the story in the reporter's book about to be published. James Risen, the reporter, had seen his story suppressed by the Times for over a year when his book finally forced the Times to publish its version, allowing the Times to control the "framing" of the explosive issue. A year that included the 2004 presidential campaign season, while the Times therefore skipped its responsibility to inform the public about the president who would be reelected by a slim margin.
But then, the Times allowed its frontpage cheerleader for the Iraq "WMD" War, Judith Miller, to avoid the August 2004 Federal subpoenas into her role outing Valerie Plame, the CIA/WMD agent debunking the Iraq WMD lies sending us to war. Her trial likely would have meant another few points less for Bush in November 2004.
After these yearlong delays escorting Bush through the 2004 election, their final revelations are met with Bush's highest disapproval ratings, now in the 40% approval / 55% disapproval range. A range which itself has been escorted by the Times managing the news for minimum damage to Bush.
With the Times telling the story, why shouldn't the newspaper look even better than Bush does?
Slashdot Mirror
How about that total matter-energy conversion they've been doing with antimatter and dilithium crystals in LA for decades?
How about requiring American corporations to keep their accounting computers in the US, where US laws can govern them? And while they're at it, how about Congress making some laws that actually stop Enrons, WorldComs and Andersons and their Kenny-boy Lay generation from robbing people?
I'm looking beyond the microchip at the nanochip swarm. A thousand chiplets, each containing just a few thousand programmable gates (like unbundled little FPGA clumps). Each signalling its state on an RF radio. With only a local clock, not a lockstep one wasting chiplet cycles. And a universal phased array for multichannel 1Gbps IO, 1TB Flash, 1Kdpi OLED and a holosonic projector.
How about if the phones just ship set to vibrate only, and people have to learn how to turn the ringer on? Make it simpler to turn the ringer on for a one-time ring on the next call, and just a little less simple to switch from vibrate to ring all the time. The dumber people who can't silence their phones when appropriate will be taken out, rather than me taking them out personally when they ruin a movie again.
A real innovation would be a mode that autoswitches the phone from ring to vibrate on a bluetooth signal. A good phone would authenticate the signal, requiring a senderID authenticated against a third-party DB. Maybe even autoswitch phones from ring to voicemail (or call forward). Then private spaces could control their environment, rather than rely on the politeness of the masses of unsophisticated phone users.
Not exactly, but we're discussing Blu-Ray discs that will not play on HDCP PCs, because of the DRM. It's only a matter of time before someone cracks that DRM. So I'm talking about the time centrally invested in stopping that vs the time spent my the masses overcoming it.
Yeah, until just one person out of the millions with PCs cracks an HDCP disc and uploads it. Is there any cost:benefit*risk analysis for this copy protection that isn't produced by the DRM industry and the CYA execs who promote it?
Leave it to Japanese to LARP Somtow Sucharitkul's Mallworld.
So the young comedian steps into the spotlight, thinks of a random number, and slyly intones into the mic: "14925".
<crickets>
He scuttles sideways into the wings, shattered by embarassment. He asks the old comedian "did I pick a loser?"
The old comedian leans over, and whispers out of the side of his mouth "no, Groucho used to kill 'em with that one".
Young comedian: "why'd I bomb?"
Old comedian: "TIMING."
As I recall, the original Pentium (I) chip had 6 direct ports for direct CPU/CPU interconnect, forming cubic arrays (with PCI buses on the "surface"). Not only allowing scaling the CPU cycles, but also allowing tasks to "route around" unaccessible (crashed or broken) CPUs. Does the Linux kernel take advantage of such a CPU "network topology"?
Now that cores are going multiple, from double to quadruple, the next step could be octuple. That could offer a "cube" of processors in a single CPU, with similar redundancy/failover routing. Possibly addressable among the cubic CPU network. Is Linux able to exploit *that* kind of multiparallelism?
And so a (bionic) bully is born. Plenty of work in Guantanamo!
All this bullying research is just a lot of talk until it can answer the age-old question for the bully's target:
A: Fight back with everything you've got, even if you're certain to lose
B: Get someone else to fight for you if you're certain they'll win
C: Do what the bully makes you do
D: Run away
In the event the bully targets you again, especially after C and/or D:
E: Choose another option from A-D
F: Lay a trap, even if it kills/maims the bully
And also whether making it through the initial confrontation in order to report the bully to an authority is wise.
All these tactics have up/downsides. We need research to analyze the bully. Preemptive jujitsu classes aren't enough, and being the bully has too much downside of its own.
Of course they should hold copies of all my email, as well as records of all my Internet searches. How else are they supposed to help the government protect me, even when there's no evidence of wrongdoing?
That's the inevitable path of American culture: human rights replaced by corporate rights, and humans ourselves replaced by cartoons. We've already filled the Washington DC offices and the media stages, which institutionalize our culture, with two dimensional fictional characters. Tamagochi, though not as popular as in Japan, will surely bloom in online gaming. Eventually you'll get your Disney/Homeland Security mandatory offer to download your replacement.
Moderation 0
50% Offtopic
50% Interesting
Oracle buys a servlet container company, and TrollMods say my questions about using Oracle's servlet containers are "Offtopic".
Everyone stop fighting over whether humans have caused the current climate change. Those saying "NO" aren't going to change their minds, even as incremental new evidence adds to the substantial body already accepted by climatologists - or maybe they're right. It's not worth arguing about, because it's an abstract blame game.
What is worth arguing about is how to slow, stop or reverse the change obviously now underway. The same science used to fight the blame game is much better used to learn how reducing emissions and sinking carbon can mitigate the serious risk of climate change destroying our civilization. Past civilizations, like the Anasazi in the American Southwest and whatever you want to call the civilization that desertified the Sahara across to the Gobi in China, might not have had our advantage of science and engineering. So their change happened slower, but was more inevitable. Let's harness our climate science to create new climate engineering to cope with this climate change, whether it's manmade or as natural as the arrival of Winter.
Anyone out there using Oracle's OID to do LDAP, and their servlet container, in a single app? Anyone using OID + JBoss? Any idea how that app could be improved by integration inside Oracle?
Know any docs on switching existing LDAP/servlet installations to Oracle with OID, to prepare for Oracle's apparently increased servlet support?
"The Greatest Station in the Universe", New Orleans' WWOZ, not only survived Hurricane Katrina, but has been a lifeline to New Orleanians in exile. The public radio branch of the NO Jazzfest is supported mostly by subscriptions from the public. And for years, subscribers outside New Orleans have paid much more than residents for their Crescent City Connection.
Of course, Katrina did a lot of damage to WWOZ, also - including blowing away (literally) their local FM transmission antenna and gear. And of course the unpaid volunteers who broadcast the best music ever recorded (and live realtime performances) mostly lost everything in the storm, including CD collections they have to replace. WWOZ needs subscribers and listeners now more than ever - at any level, even $1 (or E1 etc). They were succeeding in exactly the kind of Internet Radio project we want most for well over a decade - "transmitting" by FTP even before streaming software was available, in a city which still lived in the 18th and 19th Centuries.
Google's not fighting for individual rights in that court case. Google's fighting for Google's rights, or, at its broadest, corporate rights. There's no issue of individual rights involved. So your pick of Google, and its nonsensical false choice against the EFF (why choose?), doesn't hold any weight earned by legal insight on your part. In fact, since the story we're discussing shows that Google's desktop search puts your privacy at serious risk, your sticking to them seems to have no merit at all, beyond your adorable belief in the power of a (nonbinding) corporate motto like "don't be evil".
This pricing is the result of a monopoly. At first it seems like movies on the home video rack represent a diversity of choices and alternatives - multiple movies, multiple distributors, all competing for your video dollar (euro/yen/peso - but probably not yuan ;). But each movie is a unique item. With "exclusive distribution" deals, there's only one vendor of each unique item. The demand for competition, met only by piracy, is the biggest enemy of the MPAA - bringing with it customer-punishing exaggerated lawsuits.
Sure, most Hollywood movies are interchangeable in the same mass market. But somehow, they all cost the same, with huge profits and low risks. That is the fingerprint of either a monopoly, a cartel, or a price-fixing scheme.
Of course, movies are made by a single entity, a producer, so some monopoly is always inevitable. But like any other "invention", America's property laws accommodate that monopoly by allowing a limited time in which inventors can recoup their investment. That time has also been exploded into perpetuity, also by the MPAA. Who can blame them for going after a perpetual monopoly? But we can blame the people's representatives in Congress, who defy the people and the Constitution when they give the MPAA that unlimited empire.
Let the producers get a year, or 200% their dollar cost, or a second chance in any new medium under those same terms, in which to profit. After that, the limited temporary monopoly protection granted by the people to the inventors should expire. Even if we only get requirements for an open market for distributors with competitive bidding, it will be a useful "compromise".
All the surveillance is worth it, because we've caught all the terrorists! I feel safer knowing we've got all those Qaeda evildoers. I'm finally satisfied that we've caught Osama in our dragnet. And the byproduct, catching all the drug mafia, has really cleaned up the streets - and our nation's veins. So we've made some Quakers paranoid - they live to quake, right? And, in an unexpected bonus, the Republicans won't be taken by surprise by any Democratic Party dirty tricks. If only we'd let Emperor Nixon protect us, in his wisdom, we'd have all the oil we want, and terrorists would never have attacked us.
No, it's up to Linus. Developers can submit code under GPL3, or any other license. But it's up to Linus whether to include that code in his kernel source - if he accepts that incoming license, and abides by it, including the requirement that he release his new code with the inclusions under the new license. If Linus doesn't want to release a new kernel under GPL3, he can't include GPL3 code, and doesn't have to.
However, if the contributors insist on submitting code with GPL3, and Linus declines to accept it, there's some legal arguments to be resolved before deciding whether they can fork the kernel and release it under GPL3, with his code. It depends on whether GPL2 code can be released under GPL3. I wonder what Eben Moglen has to say about that. But even if it's OK, that's still not "Linux". Linus owns the trademark, and cannot allow a fork which dilutes his trademark with a different product - he'd lose the trademark.
What's so beautiful about the idea that females send unknowing new people into this cruel world, just so the mothers can leech off the stemcells? They keep the byproduct of the stemcell production around, first to help with chores, then to pose for exploitative pictures, and later to drive them to the senior club.
If Sun releases control over the project, that will make it more likely that an independent project will split OO.o into a server and AJAX clients. And that another project will cluster the OO.o server. Then Web forms and GUIs can finally have the kinds of editing control we deserve in the 21st Century. Like automatic version control. Or anything that beats these slate-like TEXTAREAs.
Hey, the NYTimes gets credit for publishing their story of Bush's domesting spying operation, even though they did so only to preempt the story in the reporter's book about to be published. James Risen, the reporter, had seen his story suppressed by the Times for over a year when his book finally forced the Times to publish its version, allowing the Times to control the "framing" of the explosive issue. A year that included the 2004 presidential campaign season, while the Times therefore skipped its responsibility to inform the public about the president who would be reelected by a slim margin.
But then, the Times allowed its frontpage cheerleader for the Iraq "WMD" War, Judith Miller, to avoid the August 2004 Federal subpoenas into her role outing Valerie Plame, the CIA/WMD agent debunking the Iraq WMD lies sending us to war. Her trial likely would have meant another few points less for Bush in November 2004.
After these yearlong delays escorting Bush through the 2004 election, their final revelations are met with Bush's highest disapproval ratings, now in the 40% approval / 55% disapproval range. A range which itself has been escorted by the Times managing the news for minimum damage to Bush.
With the Times telling the story, why shouldn't the newspaper look even better than Bush does?
Is that how (human) drivers know I'm looking at them when I'm passing them in traffic, but before they're facing me, without using their mirrors?