Possibly because Kasparov doesn't play soley on raw intellect. Gut instinct and that hint of irrationality creeps in. The computer can't take that into account when anticipating Kasparov's possible countermoves.
Yes, but what the computer can do is calculate the probability of all of Kasparov's moves, then only explore the options that are most probable. Although the computer cannot correctly predict the exact move Kasparov is going to make, it can probably narrow it down to 2 or 3 likely moves. It can pretty much ignore all the other moves, because Kasparov is not going to make a bad play. Kasparov's move is either going to be the best move for the situation, or at least the second or third best move. Although the 'best move' for any given chess scenario is debatable, the way the computer plays is to quantify the relative strengths of different positions and try to get into the strongest position. It is something that they are quite good at and I only expect them to get better as they get more raw power coutesy of Moore's Law.
Re:For the most part, looks like the exhibit sucks
on
Review: Illegal Art
·
· Score: 1
I think your reaction is natural tho; imagine how many people should feel upset at whoever wrote the song "Happy Birthday".. its such a simple song, it seems like anyone could come up with it. The point is, nobody did until the composer did. So the composer deserves the credit (like the artist for the CD piece) for recognizing that something so simple could still become a point of conversation, of thought, for other people.
It is ironic that you choose "Happy Birthday" to illustrate your example, as it has been a very hotly contested copyright. Do you really think the schoolteacher that put those seven notes together in 1893 deserves 2 million dollars per year? Not that she saw any of the actual money, she was dead long before the song actually paid any royalties. Only other people have profited off of "Happy Birthday", the original author got nothing for her (limited amount of) work. In fact, that $2M/year is going to AOL-Time Warner, who else? Like the majority of copyrights-it only goes to benefit the large media corporations, not the starving artist. Extending copyright terms well past the death of the artist does no good for the creator, as they will only see money until they die. It doesn't seem to me like this is promoting more art (which is the aim of the copyright principle), as the actual artist sees no added benefit. Life+x terms are simply to benefit the corporations that bought the laws in the first place.
FUCK ME HARDER. I am extremely pissed off that Mozilla blocked this EULA from me, shouldn't there be a setting to "Allow scripts to open only requested orfunny windows"?
Re:What are you guys trying to do today?
on
Review: Illegal Art
·
· Score: 1
I, for one, welcome our new insect overlords.
I'd like to remind them that as a trusted TV personality, I can be helpful in rounding up others to toil in their underground
sugar caves. -KB
You will find a picture of a computer and it says "My Computer".
Therefor it is. My Computer!...
Yes, but the software does not belong to you. You merely have a license to use it. The software belongs to Bill Gates so it should really say "Bill's Computer".
There is a more important question: Why can't your customers send email through their ISP's SMTP server?
Thay can. That is what we advise them to do when this issue arises. However, I feel that they should not have to. It's not that I think that blocking port 25 won't help stop spam. I just am against ISPs filtering service in any way. Once they start down the slippery slope of filtering, I doubt it will end.
I run a secure mail server (written by the person quoted in your sig) and I do not relay spam. All SMTP users must authenticate. I realize that not all administrators configure their servers properly and there are many open relays in the wild, but I don't think that filtering network traffic to certain services is the solution to this problem.
I mean really.. what logical reason do AOL and friends have have for allowing customers on a $10/month disposeable account to connect *directly* to other people's mail servers?
I work for a small company that offers web hosting. Along with the web hosting, we give the customer mail accounts, with SMTP, POP and IMAP access. We have had numerous complaints from customers that were unable to connect to the SMTP server because thier ISP blocks port 25. Why shouldn't they be able to connect to any server they like? This is certainly legitimate traffic but it is being blocked because some jackasses send spam and other jackasses run open relays. Why should my users be blocked because of the actions of other users?
All I want from an ISP is an unfiltered network connection. Once the ISP starts filtering the service it is unlikely to stop. What is the next service to go? Surely people don't need to connect to IMAP or POP servers that are not on the ISP's network. Block 110 and 143. Better block 6346 while we're at it, as it cuts into the pocketbooks of our partners. Don't forget 22, it allows people to work on VIRUSES without the ISP being able to detect it! Pretty soon the network connections ISPs provide will be nearly nonexistent. Port 80 will be open to sites on the whitelist, and you can get a connection on 443 to sites that have registered with the ISP (and paid their tax to Verisign) but all other ports will be blocked. After all, why would anyone need to connect to any service that is not web-based? As everyone knows, 'the internet' == 'www' and connections to other services are not needed.
If I pay for internet access, I don't think it is unreasonable to expect access to all available services. Instead of harrassing the ISPs into degrading my service, how about harassing the mail server vendors to produce products that connot be configured as open relays?
So the article on preventing the/. effect... will be tested to see if it's meaningful. I like that. That is definitely putting your money where your mouth is.
Yep. Looks like they really put their money where there mouth is. When I try to access the page I receive the infamous "The document contains no data". They are already down and the article will be on the/. front page for another day. Reading an article on server scaling from these guys is like taking a class in conflict resolution from Saddam and GWB.
You'll notice that these have nearly 100% inter-operability with any tech out there (alien or not), and it is wireless.
As R2D2 has showed us the most high-tech, interoperable interface is not radio, electrical or even optical, it is mechanical. He's got to be able to push at least 5 bps through that thing.
Ever wonder why you can't buy those handy lock jimmys the cops use? They can be marketed as an alternative method fo ropening your car when you have a brain fart and lock the keys inside it. They could also, and most likely will be, used mainly for stealing cars, hence their not being made avialable on the open market.
Ever wonder why people on/. just make shit up with no substantiation? There are multiple non-infringing uses for lockpicks, "Slim Jims" and the like. It certainly is not just the police who can own or use them. For example, you can buy one right here, long with other lock-defeating devices. It is not illegal to own lockpicks or a Slim Jim, it is just illegal to use them to aid in the commission of a crime such as burglary. Just like it should not be illegal to sell modchips, it should only be illegal to use if you are using it to play pirated games. There are substantial non-infringing uses, I hope the courts see that and allow the sale of the chips to continue.
if one were to legally purchase an eBook and use Elcomsoft's software to convert the eBook into a PDF to view in otherwise incompatible viewers, for personal use only (not to be shared), then I believe that would be legit, since it is not legal for content copyright holders to prevent the user from personal use of the copyrighted materials.
IANAL, but the way I understand the "fair use" principle, the copyright holder can do whatever they like in an attempt to prevent you from copying their work. They just are not allowed to prosecute you if you do manage to copy it.
Of course you would need to copy it with tools that you build yourself. If you used somebody else's tools (like the ebook decryption program in question or decss) then the author may be found guilty of violating the DMCA for distributing a "circumvention device". I don't think it is illegal to possess a circumvention device, I believe it is just illegal to (willfully) distribute them.
Not only that, but how does the DMCA have any right to step over into Russia? Regardless of whether or not it was found to have cracked any eBooks, who are these people to say that Russian businesses fall under the DMCA?
Yes, but they were selling the software in the United States. No matter where the software was coded or where the company was based, according to the article it is illegal to use in the US and selling it brought on the charges. Fortunately the Judge had a little wisdom and ruled that they needed to "willfully" be violating the DCMA to be found guilty. However, the software is still ruled illegal.
If a company based in Nevada opened a casino in Utah it would be illegal even though gambling is legal in Nevada.
If you have a way of pushing policy to Windows clients from a Samba DC on Linux you will make at least one sysadmin very very happy.
It was my understanding that you create the policy then drop the *.pol files in the netlogon share on your PDC and the workstations will download them and apply them upon startup. I am working on implementing a Samba DC myself, but it is like pulling teeth to get anything to work right. So for now it is relegated to the test network.
How can you load your own guide on the tivo...is this a way to use one and NOT have to pay the guide fee?
Yes, there is a way. People don't talk about it much, because the ones who use it don't want to make it popular and cause problems. If you do some judicious Google searches you will find what you are seeking.
One reason I bought a ReplayTV was I didn't want my recorder trying to psychoanalyse me.
It's not human, it's just a machine. If you don't like suggestions, turn them off.
Instead I can tell it to record what I want (either specific programs, by keyword search, or by category).
Just like the Tivo can...
It connects to the program guide via my home network, instead of modem-ing into some host in the dark of night.
Just like the Tivo can...
I can share programs with others, and there is software to pull the programs off of the unit and onto my PC.
The Replay's sharing feature is something the Tivo does not have. However, software to pull the programs off the unit is available and once the video is off you can share it to your hearts delight. I can also do next day schedule changes to my recordings via the web.
I can do real-time scheduling changes on my Tivo, manage my current programs, queue imports or exports and many other functions from a web browser. There have been a multitude of third-party hacks produced for the Tivo, like displaying caller-id info on your TV screen, monitoring AIM messages and new email notification.
Not bad for $250 bucks and a $10/month service fee.
Yep, about the same for Tivo, unless you load your own guide data. Can you do that on your Replay;) ?
To each his own, etc. The Replay is a good product and it sounds like you enjoy it. But in my view, the Tivo is superior in almost every way.
But aren't you still subject to sudden "reprogramming" (aka upgrades), since the Tivo box calls home every night? That would be the issue I'd be most concerned about - that the studios one day would get a court injunction
Yes, that is always a danger, but there is a way around it: backups. I have a backup of my Tivo from before it was ever plugged in (by me) and also have backups of most of the software revisions since then. If Tivo decides to send a software update I don't like, I will simply pull my drive, restore my most recent backup and load my own (scraped) guide data.
Can a TiVo stream shows to different computers all over your house?
I am working on it. Video can be exported and converted to mpeg, it is just a matter of automating it on the other computers. Check http://www.corruptdb.com/
Can a TiVo run BitchX?
AFAIK, Nobody has compiled it, but I'm sure it can. The Tivo runs Linux, you can compile pretty much anything that runs on Linux to run on the Tivo. Gaim is available and also several other communication programs (POP3 clients, etc.). Or play MP3s?
Yes.
Or play DVDs?
Not yet:) Although if you did rip the DVD to MPEG it is trivial to pipe it directly to the Tivo's MPEG decoder chip.
As for the cost, most geeks have at least one spare computer laying around. Pick up a better tuner card and a good sound card and you are good to go.
My plans include having low-powered diskless computers serving as "dumb Tivos" to playback the video that is originally captured by my Tivo. Most of the processing will happen on my server, but I also plan to implement Tivo to Tivo and Tivo to Computer streaming for video on demand anywhere on my network. The Tivo will be used as the main capture station because none of the currently available software even comes close to the functionality of the Tivo for selecting programs to record.
Re:Careful, there's a gotcha with IDE RAID...
on
IDE RAID Examined
·
· Score: 4, Informative
Each IDE controller can support up to two drives, a master and a slave. What happens if you hang two drives off one controller, and the "master" drive dies?
Actually, any modern standard IDE controller supports 2 channels or four devices. You are right in saying you shouldn't have more than 1 device per channel, or 2 devices on a standard controller. Most of the dedicated RAID IDE controllers like the ones review in the article have 4 or more channels. This allows you to build a pretty big RAID before you would consider putting a disk on as a slave.
Standard controllers are cheap, I just added a controller and 2 drives to my linux software RAID and it cost me less than $200 for the controller and the drives (80 GB and 30 GB). IIRC, the controller was ~$40. With prices like that, there is no need to run more than 1 drive per channel (unless you run out of PCI slots).
[10:41pm]/root> hdparm -t/dev/md0/dev/md0:
Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 1.40 seconds = 45.71 MB/sec
My main home fileserver has a linux software RAID-5 configuration. I recently upgraded it and added 2 more disks. md0 is 3x50GB, so 100GB total, and md1 is 6x30 GB, 150 GB total. The system has 3 80 GB disks, 3 30 GB disks and an 8 GB system disk. Here is the output of hdparm on the arrays:
# hdparm -tT/dev/md0/dev/md0:
Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 0.80 seconds =159.47 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 1.69 seconds = 37.84 MB/sec
# hdparm -tT/dev/md1/dev/md1:
Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 0.81 seconds =158.69 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 1.04 seconds = 61.36 MB/sec
This is more than enough performance for my needs, and it can easily saturate my 100Mb ethernet (and the PCI bus).
At work, I run a similar card to one of the ones tested in the article (I have the Promise SuperTrak 3000) in one of my servers and I couldn't be happier with it. I have the Promise SuperSwap enclosures paired with it in a RAID-5 configuration. They really are a grest combination, the card can use the enclosure status lights to show you array status (in addition to the LEDs onboard the controller) and the combination also lets you hot swap drives. Pretty much the same performance and features of SCSI at half the cost. I had a drive blink out last week and the array handled it nicely. I swapped it out and the array rebuilt without the server skipping a beat.
By contrast, who keeps a Microsoft product for five years without upgrading it? Especially in a corporate environment?
Actually, a corporate environment is more likely to stay with an old operating system than an individual or small business. There are still plenty of companies that are still using NT4 with Novell clients, or even Windows 3.11. Hell, there are still many (inventory, purchasing, etc.) systems that run on mainframe-type unix terminals. Agreed, most companies don't go 5 years without upgrading but there are certainly some that do.
You raise an excellent point concerning cable modems. What you describe used to be possible with ADSL in the UK until recently. The main difference being, I presume that your cable co own the modem and rent it to you - so you don't own the kit. That's a clearer case. Not your box, so you definately don't have the right to fiddle with it. Even so, it's still fairly stupid of them not to throttle your bandwith at the other end.
Actually, many of the cable services in the US allow/require that you buy your own cable modem. However, it still is not legal to change your quality of service with it. If you want to set up your own headend, feel free to uncap your modem all you want, but if you are using the cable company's headend then upcapping your modem is theft of service and is a criminal act.
those users are TYPICALLY (but not always, i understand of course) are pirating software or infringing copyrights by downloading music or movies.
I would like it if my ISP would improve my internet experience,
You have to be an ISP shill. Nobody uses phrases like "internet experience" except marketing people for ISPs. There are many legitimate uses of bandwidth that are not "pirating software or infringing copyrights". For example, all the Linux machines on my LAN use the Red Hat Network to stay updated on bugfixes and security issues. Although each individual fix is usually not very large, with several machines over the course of a month it can use significant bandwidth. No matter what the IP interests tell you, some network traffic is not related to copyright infringment.
An analogy to a buffet and somebody taking all the food back to their table was used earlier in this thread, I would like to explore that a little. Cable ISPs are much like a buffets, in that they (currently) offer an 'all you can eat' service for a set price. The buffet owners realize that the people most likely to come to a buffet are people who can eat alot of food. But obviously the cable company hasn't come to the same realization about their customers. People who pay the extra money for broadband are the people who are interested in things that require more bandwidth than a dial-up connection can offer. Therefore, they are likely to use more bandwidth than a dial-up user. If the buffet started barring all people over 200 pounds at the door (or limiting the amount of food they are actually allowed to eat) because they can eat more than skinny people, there would be outrage. Even if they told the skinny people that the fat people were 'food hogs' and were eating all the available food.
which consists of some email, a bit of ICQ, casual web browsing, and the occasional shareware/freeware/OSS download. I think that this represents the majority of high-speed subscribers.
I would have to disagree with you there. I believe that the majority of high-speed subscribers are people for whom a dial-up connection was limiting. I don't think that most people who think the internet == port 80 are broadband users (yet). There are still millions of people for whom AOL is enough 'internet experience'. Granted, this is the type of customer the broadband ISP likes the most, just as the buffet likes people who don't eat much food. But that does not mean they should discriminate against their cutomers that download or eat more. People to whom greater bandwidth is important are more likely to eat at the internet buffet.
For example roads are a commodity in a pretty real sense; but we don't charge per use; even though a particular road can only carry a certain number of cars or lorries before requiring repair.
That is what gasoline tax is for. It is a use tax for roads. You drive more (or a heavier vehicle), you buy more fuel and you pay more taxes for building roads. Next time you are at the pump look at the little sticker that tells you how much tax is on each gallon. I don't remember the exact numbers from my state, but it is well over 50% of the price per gallon. Don't get me wrong, I am against metering bandwidth, I just felt the need to point out the flaw in your analogy.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, but what the computer can do is calculate the probability of all of Kasparov's moves, then only explore the options that are most probable. Although the computer cannot correctly predict the exact move Kasparov is going to make, it can probably narrow it down to 2 or 3 likely moves. It can pretty much ignore all the other moves, because Kasparov is not going to make a bad play. Kasparov's move is either going to be the best move for the situation, or at least the second or third best move. Although the 'best move' for any given chess scenario is debatable, the way the computer plays is to quantify the relative strengths of different positions and try to get into the strongest position. It is something that they are quite good at and I only expect them to get better as they get more raw power coutesy of Moore's Law.
It is ironic that you choose "Happy Birthday" to illustrate your example, as it has been a very hotly contested copyright. Do you really think the schoolteacher that put those seven notes together in 1893 deserves 2 million dollars per year? Not that she saw any of the actual money, she was dead long before the song actually paid any royalties. Only other people have profited off of "Happy Birthday", the original author got nothing for her (limited amount of) work. In fact, that $2M/year is going to AOL-Time Warner, who else? Like the majority of copyrights-it only goes to benefit the large media corporations, not the starving artist. Extending copyright terms well past the death of the artist does no good for the creator, as they will only see money until they die. It doesn't seem to me like this is promoting more art (which is the aim of the copyright principle), as the actual artist sees no added benefit. Life+x terms are simply to benefit the corporations that bought the laws in the first place.
FUCK ME HARDER. I am extremely pissed off that Mozilla blocked this EULA from me, shouldn't there be a setting to "Allow scripts to open only requested or funny windows"?
I'd like to remind them that as a trusted TV personality, I can be helpful in rounding up others to toil in their underground sugar caves.
-KB
Yes, but the software does not belong to you. You merely have a license to use it. The software belongs to Bill Gates so it should really say "Bill's Computer".
Thay can. That is what we advise them to do when this issue arises. However, I feel that they should not have to. It's not that I think that blocking port 25 won't help stop spam. I just am against ISPs filtering service in any way. Once they start down the slippery slope of filtering, I doubt it will end.
I run a secure mail server (written by the person quoted in your sig) and I do not relay spam. All SMTP users must authenticate. I realize that not all administrators configure their servers properly and there are many open relays in the wild, but I don't think that filtering network traffic to certain services is the solution to this problem.
I work for a small company that offers web hosting. Along with the web hosting, we give the customer mail accounts, with SMTP, POP and IMAP access. We have had numerous complaints from customers that were unable to connect to the SMTP server because thier ISP blocks port 25. Why shouldn't they be able to connect to any server they like? This is certainly legitimate traffic but it is being blocked because some jackasses send spam and other jackasses run open relays. Why should my users be blocked because of the actions of other users?
All I want from an ISP is an unfiltered network connection. Once the ISP starts filtering the service it is unlikely to stop. What is the next service to go? Surely people don't need to connect to IMAP or POP servers that are not on the ISP's network. Block 110 and 143. Better block 6346 while we're at it, as it cuts into the pocketbooks of our partners. Don't forget 22, it allows people to work on VIRUSES without the ISP being able to detect it! Pretty soon the network connections ISPs provide will be nearly nonexistent. Port 80 will be open to sites on the whitelist, and you can get a connection on 443 to sites that have registered with the ISP (and paid their tax to Verisign) but all other ports will be blocked. After all, why would anyone need to connect to any service that is not web-based? As everyone knows, 'the internet' == 'www' and connections to other services are not needed.
If I pay for internet access, I don't think it is unreasonable to expect access to all available services. Instead of harrassing the ISPs into degrading my service, how about harassing the mail server vendors to produce products that connot be configured as open relays?
Yep. Looks like they really put their money where there mouth is. When I try to access the page I receive the infamous "The document contains no data". They are already down and the article will be on the /. front page for another day. Reading an article on server scaling from these guys is like taking a class in conflict resolution from Saddam and GWB.
As R2D2 has showed us the most high-tech, interoperable interface is not radio, electrical or even optical, it is mechanical. He's got to be able to push at least 5 bps through that thing.
Ever wonder why people on /. just make shit up with no substantiation? There are multiple non-infringing uses for lockpicks, "Slim Jims" and the like. It certainly is not just the police who can own or use them. For example, you can buy one right here, long with other lock-defeating devices. It is not illegal to own lockpicks or a Slim Jim, it is just illegal to use them to aid in the commission of a crime such as burglary. Just like it should not be illegal to sell modchips, it should only be illegal to use if you are using it to play pirated games. There are substantial non-infringing uses, I hope the courts see that and allow the sale of the chips to continue.
if one were to legally purchase an eBook and use Elcomsoft's software to convert the eBook into a PDF to view in otherwise incompatible viewers, for personal use only (not to be shared), then I believe that would be legit, since it is not legal for content copyright holders to prevent the user from personal use of the copyrighted materials.
IANAL, but the way I understand the "fair use" principle, the copyright holder can do whatever they like in an attempt to prevent you from copying their work. They just are not allowed to prosecute you if you do manage to copy it.
Of course you would need to copy it with tools that you build yourself. If you used somebody else's tools (like the ebook decryption program in question or decss) then the author may be found guilty of violating the DMCA for distributing a "circumvention device". I don't think it is illegal to possess a circumvention device, I believe it is just illegal to (willfully) distribute them.
Not only that, but how does the DMCA have any right to step over into Russia? Regardless of whether or not it was found
to have cracked any eBooks, who are these people to say that Russian businesses fall under the DMCA?
Yes, but they were selling the software in the United States. No matter where the software was coded or where the company was based, according to the article it is illegal to use in the US and selling it brought on the charges. Fortunately the Judge had a little wisdom and ruled that they needed to "willfully" be violating the DCMA to be found guilty. However, the software is still ruled illegal.
If a company based in Nevada opened a casino in Utah it would be illegal even though gambling is legal in Nevada.
It was my understanding that you create the policy then drop the *.pol files in the netlogon share on your PDC and the workstations will download them and apply them upon startup. I am working on implementing a Samba DC myself, but it is like pulling teeth to get anything to work right. So for now it is relegated to the test network.
"Anti-Amarikin"
According to our president, it's "Un-Merrikin" to post as an AC in "Merrika". "Anti-Amarikin" is just too big of a word for him.
How can you load your own guide on the tivo...is this a way to use one and NOT have to pay the guide fee?
Yes, there is a way. People don't talk about it much, because the ones who use it don't want to make it popular and cause problems. If you do some judicious Google searches you will find what you are seeking.
One reason I bought a ReplayTV was I didn't want my recorder trying to psychoanalyse me.
;) ?
It's not human, it's just a machine. If you don't like suggestions, turn them off.
Instead I can tell it to record what I want (either specific programs, by keyword search, or by category).
Just like the Tivo can...
It connects to the program guide via my home network, instead of modem-ing into some host in the dark of night.
Just like the Tivo can...
I can share programs with others, and there is software to pull the programs off of the unit and onto my PC.
The Replay's sharing feature is something the Tivo does not have. However, software to pull the programs off the unit is available and once the video is off you can share it to your hearts delight.
I can also do next day schedule changes to my recordings via the web.
I can do real-time scheduling changes on my Tivo, manage my current programs, queue imports or exports and many other functions from a web browser. There have been a multitude of third-party hacks produced for the Tivo, like displaying caller-id info on your TV screen, monitoring AIM messages and new email notification.
Not bad for $250 bucks and a $10/month service fee.
Yep, about the same for Tivo, unless you load your own guide data. Can you do that on your Replay
To each his own, etc. The Replay is a good product and it sounds like you enjoy it. But in my view, the Tivo is superior in almost every way.
But aren't you still subject to sudden "reprogramming" (aka upgrades), since the Tivo box calls home every night? That would be the issue I'd be most concerned about - that the studios one day would get a court injunction
Yes, that is always a danger, but there is a way around it: backups. I have a backup of my Tivo from before it was ever plugged in (by me) and also have backups of most of the software revisions since then. If Tivo decides to send a software update I don't like, I will simply pull my drive, restore my most recent backup and load my own (scraped) guide data.
Can a TiVo permemantly archive shows to CDR in VCD format?
p ?s=&forumid=23
:) Although if you did rip the DVD to MPEG it is trivial to pipe it directly to the Tivo's MPEG decoder chip.
http://www.dealdatabase.com/forum/forumdisplay.ph
Can a TiVo stream shows to different computers all over your house?
I am working on it. Video can be exported and converted to mpeg, it is just a matter of automating it on the other computers. Check http://www.corruptdb.com/
Can a TiVo run BitchX?
AFAIK, Nobody has compiled it, but I'm sure it can. The Tivo runs Linux, you can compile pretty much anything that runs on Linux to run on the Tivo. Gaim is available and also several other communication programs (POP3 clients, etc.).
Or play MP3s?
Yes.
Or play DVDs?
Not yet
As for the cost, most geeks have at least one spare computer laying around. Pick up a better tuner card and a good sound card and you are good to go.
My plans include having low-powered diskless computers serving as "dumb Tivos" to playback the video that is originally captured by my Tivo. Most of the processing will happen on my server, but I also plan to implement Tivo to Tivo and Tivo to Computer streaming for video on demand anywhere on my network. The Tivo will be used as the main capture station because none of the currently available software even comes close to the functionality of the Tivo for selecting programs to record.
Each IDE controller can support up to two drives, a master and a slave. What happens if you hang two drives off one controller, and the "master" drive dies?
Actually, any modern standard IDE controller supports 2 channels or four devices. You are right in saying you shouldn't have more than 1 device per channel, or 2 devices on a standard controller. Most of the dedicated RAID IDE controllers like the ones review in the article have 4 or more channels. This allows you to build a pretty big RAID before you would consider putting a disk on as a slave.
Standard controllers are cheap, I just added a controller and 2 drives to my linux software RAID and it cost me less than $200 for the controller and the drives (80 GB and 30 GB). IIRC, the controller was ~$40. With prices like that, there is no need to run more than 1 drive per channel (unless you run out of PCI slots).
Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 1.40 seconds = 45.71 MB/sec
My main home fileserver has a linux software RAID-5 configuration. I recently upgraded it and added 2 more disks. md0 is 3x50GB, so 100GB total, and md1 is 6x30 GB, 150 GB total. The system has 3 80 GB disks, 3 30 GB disks and an 8 GB system disk. Here is the output of hdparm on the arrays:
# hdparm -tT /dev/md0 /dev/md0:
/dev/md1 /dev/md1:
Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 0.80 seconds =159.47 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 1.69 seconds = 37.84 MB/sec
# hdparm -tT
Timing buffer-cache reads: 128 MB in 0.81 seconds =158.69 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 1.04 seconds = 61.36 MB/sec
This is more than enough performance for my needs, and it can easily saturate my 100Mb ethernet (and the PCI bus).
At work, I run a similar card to one of the ones tested in the article (I have the Promise SuperTrak 3000) in one of my servers and I couldn't be happier with it. I have the Promise SuperSwap enclosures paired with it in a RAID-5 configuration. They really are a grest combination, the card can use the enclosure status lights to show you array status (in addition to the LEDs onboard the controller) and the combination also lets you hot swap drives. Pretty much the same performance and features of SCSI at half the cost. I had a drive blink out last week and the array handled it nicely. I swapped it out and the array rebuilt without the server skipping a beat.
Actually, a corporate environment is more likely to stay with an old operating system than an individual or small business. There are still plenty of companies that are still using NT4 with Novell clients, or even Windows 3.11. Hell, there are still many (inventory, purchasing, etc.) systems that run on mainframe-type unix terminals. Agreed, most companies don't go 5 years without upgrading but there are certainly some that do.
Actually, many of the cable services in the US allow/require that you buy your own cable modem. However, it still is not legal to change your quality of service with it. If you want to set up your own headend, feel free to uncap your modem all you want, but if you are using the cable company's headend then upcapping your modem is theft of service and is a criminal act.
I would like it if my ISP would improve my internet experience,
You have to be an ISP shill. Nobody uses phrases like "internet experience" except marketing people for ISPs. There are many legitimate uses of bandwidth that are not "pirating software or infringing copyrights". For example, all the Linux machines on my LAN use the Red Hat Network to stay updated on bugfixes and security issues. Although each individual fix is usually not very large, with several machines over the course of a month it can use significant bandwidth. No matter what the IP interests tell you, some network traffic is not related to copyright infringment.
An analogy to a buffet and somebody taking all the food back to their table was used earlier in this thread, I would like to explore that a little. Cable ISPs are much like a buffets, in that they (currently) offer an 'all you can eat' service for a set price. The buffet owners realize that the people most likely to come to a buffet are people who can eat alot of food. But obviously the cable company hasn't come to the same realization about their customers. People who pay the extra money for broadband are the people who are interested in things that require more bandwidth than a dial-up connection can offer. Therefore, they are likely to use more bandwidth than a dial-up user. If the buffet started barring all people over 200 pounds at the door (or limiting the amount of food they are actually allowed to eat) because they can eat more than skinny people, there would be outrage. Even if they told the skinny people that the fat people were 'food hogs' and were eating all the available food.
which consists of some email, a bit of ICQ, casual web browsing, and the occasional shareware/freeware/OSS download. I think that this represents the majority of high-speed subscribers.
I would have to disagree with you there. I believe that the majority of high-speed subscribers are people for whom a dial-up connection was limiting. I don't think that most people who think the internet == port 80 are broadband users (yet). There are still millions of people for whom AOL is enough 'internet experience'. Granted, this is the type of customer the broadband ISP likes the most, just as the buffet likes people who don't eat much food. But that does not mean they should discriminate against their cutomers that download or eat more. People to whom greater bandwidth is important are more likely to eat at the internet buffet.
That is what gasoline tax is for. It is a use tax for roads. You drive more (or a heavier vehicle), you buy more fuel and you pay more taxes for building roads. Next time you are at the pump look at the little sticker that tells you how much tax is on each gallon. I don't remember the exact numbers from my state, but it is well over 50% of the price per gallon. Don't get me wrong, I am against metering bandwidth, I just felt the need to point out the flaw in your analogy.
But how do we get the images back or control it? Wouldn't we have to have a repeater station on the moon or at L4 or L5?
From what I understand of the project, the plan is to have it in the Earth-Sun L2, not the Earth-Moon L2.