First, don't forget you can download (and upload) with outgoing connections as well.
If everyone was NAT'd, it would push for further development of NAT-traversal technology, as well as Bidirectional sattelite, as well as other means of obtaining non-wired, unrestricted internet.
I maintain that it destroys a lot of functionality, offers nothing in return and will eventually be technologically obsolete. Lets not even mention IPv6, the spirit of which goes totally contrary to your proposal.
What I propose would merely add an additional cost for people who want to run these servers, not actually render it impossible to do so.
Why should I have to pay more to be able to VNC into my box at home? Why should I have to pay more to use VoIP? Why should I pay more to host a game of UT2k4? Why should I pay more so that my linux torrents download faster?
"Servers" or Incoming ports are for a hell of a lot more then "giving stuff away for free".
What you propose is to completely destroy a huge portion of the net's usefullness (ex: I troubleshoot PC problems remotely for my clients over VNC, all the time) to the average user, with no benifit to the user what so ever.
People would cancel their accounts with these "ISPs" so fast they'd need to hire extra staff to handle the calls. New ISPs that offered a REAL net connection at a reasonable rate would spring up to take their place.
If you want to program, get an EE or Computer Engineering degree instead of a CS degree.
I wish somebody told me this 2.5 years ago when I started a Computer Engineering degree.
Now I'm looking for internships between my second to last and last year, and my choices are programming, writing technical liteature, programming, and software validation.
I had these crazy dreams of designing and building CPUs and other cool digital logic type stuff, but it looks like I'm going to end up a code monkey:(
RTFA: In fact, Forest believes the scene will eventually go legit, and he's even started a company, called Jun Group, that uses the topsites to promote movies, musicians, and TV shows. "The topsites don't care where their files come from, as long as no one else has them," he says. Last summer Jun Group dropped a collection of live videos and MP3s from Steve Winwood on the topsites. "We got 2.9 million downloads," says Forest, "and album sales took off."
Those 2.9m downloads were of LEGIT, authorized-for-distribution content that "the scene" was used to spread. No "piracy" happened here.
Meanwhile, people with more powerful reasoning skills, understand that 2.9M infringements, do not and will not equate to 2.9M sales.
If every pirate shows the movie/show/etc.. to just *one* friend who buys it, then #download==#sales. You're completely forggetting about the most effective method of advertising possible: Word Of Mouth.
It's fuckwads like you with your "powerful reasoning skills" that run the **AAs, and will cause the collapse of the entertainment industry. Fuck you all, you've done it to yourselves. My only hope is that you shut the fuck up and stay the fuck out when the industry is reborn to take advantage of technology, not litigate gainst it.
The only information I have seen regarding SCO in Germany is that they have been enjoined from making claims regarding copyright violations without revealing more about the factual basis of the claims. While perhaps this is a positive in a case like SCO, it seems to me to be an indication that free-speach rights are pretty weak in Germany.
Please.. "Free speech" does not include the right to make allogations (with no factual basis) for the purposes of spreading FUD. The judge in Germany saw through their scheme, and told them to cram it up their cramhole.
But seriously, I completely agree with your points. I don't know if going around overwriting old data is the correct way to go about it, but there should have at least been a check.. if you assume a max of 32k transactions, you'd sure as hell better check that assertion is true, and tell the user if it fails. Bonus points for telling the user if it ever comes close to failing.
But hey.. it's 15 year old highly-specialized software, I bet the code was a result of some late-night hacking session.
The/Q just skips bad sector checks (these take 99% of the formatting time). Your data is still recoverable either way (unformat).
If you're gonna do the Ctrl+Break thing, it does work, but do NOT use/Q. It works because the bad sector check is done first, and this is the "progress meter". If you abort the bad sector check at 99%, no harm is done.
It's important to note that if the chances of impact are 1 in 45, then the chances that future observations will exclude the possibility impact are 44 in 45.
No. "Asteroid hitting Earth" is a Bernoulli event. It hits, or it does not hit. Our current estimates are P[hit] = 1/45. P[miss] = 44/45. However, we do not know what our next estimate is going to be, and the current estimate doesn't (in a strictly propabilistic sense) tell us anything about future estimates.
The two events "asteroid hits us" and "we can never exclude the possibility of it hitting us" are equivalent: the first happens if and only if the second happens. Therefore the two events have the same probability.
"we can never exclude the possibility of it hitting us" isn't an event.. I think the event you meant is "asteroid doesn't miss us".
there is no reassuring "extremely high" probability that future observations will correct the number downward.
Well.. no. There is some 3D region in space through which scientists figured out the asteroid will pass through. The "propability of a hit" is nothing but the ratio of the volume of earth contained inside this region to the total size of the region.
Now, as we have more information, we can shrink the size of this region. Since the parts we're going to be cutting off first are the outsides of the region (as we get better readings), it's fairly logical to assume that since the region is going to shrink around us, the propability of us getting hit is going to go UP at first, as is happening now.
Eventually however, we will (hopefully) start to be able to remove parts of the earth from the region, at which time the ratio will begin to go down. Eventually, when the region no longer contains the earth, the chance of being hit is 0.
What if the.torrents were put on a P2P network? The files are no longer very big so the scaling issues are not that important. If people are worried that the MPAA are going to go after people who store.torrents, why not encrypt them, or spread them between two/three "buddy" hosts...
The MPAA is not just going after big.torrent hosts, that's either shitty reporting or a diversion. They're going after big trackers.
Storing and distributing.torrents anonymously isn't the problem.. they're such little files, you can usually cram them just about anywhere (DNS maybe even?). Storing and distributing peer lists is the real problem.
BT isn't a p2p network in the conventional sense, it's a network of p2p networks. Each "torrent" is a p2p network on it's own, self contained and independent of any other torrent.
This p2p network needs a way to keep track of it's members, and hereing comes the tracker. The tracker's primary duty is to deliver random subset of the peerlist to peers when they request it.
So, an effective tracker must
1) Know of -all- the peer's IPs in the swarm 2) Be easy to contact 3) Give away peer's IPs to anyone who asks
Thus, BT as it currently sits (a quick, efficient way to offload some server bandwidth onto users) is not suited for illegal content: That same thing which makes it good/strong/fast (the trackers) is what makes it easy to litigate.
PS: In BT, pieces very, very rarely arrive from a single source.. I don't think this has stopped anyone from litigating.
Agreed. I've switched from OE to TB few months ago (when the 1.0-pres came out, and people were encouraged to try to import their old mail and submit bugs) and since it imported my mail flawlessly (almost, I had folder names with / in them that I had to rename first) I've never looked back.
And, I got the pleasure of un-installing Popfile.. good program, but hogs memory needlessly.
Governmental corruption and the religion of the population are not directly correlated.
Relly? Have you looked at what's going on in the USA lately, in the name of God? It's turned into a case of Christian God (us) vs Islamic God (them). And if you're not with "us", you're with "them", and you have no rights.
This is exactly how totalitarian regimes are born; the war between Eurasia and Oceania has already begun.. Orwell was right, just 20 years off.
Russia is corrupt becuase their gov't are puppets, the police are underpaid (read: bribed) and the country is run by organized crime syndicates.. not because they're "Christian".
Slashdot Mirror
Pedant.
I meant they're mediocre as compared to other "first world" nations.
AVG Personal Edition
The last page of that article pretty much sums it up: Most americans are mediocre (at best), but think very highly of themselves.
First, don't forget you can download (and upload) with outgoing connections as well.
If everyone was NAT'd, it would push for further development of NAT-traversal technology, as well as Bidirectional sattelite, as well as other means of obtaining non-wired, unrestricted internet.
I maintain that it destroys a lot of functionality, offers nothing in return and will eventually be technologically obsolete. Lets not even mention IPv6, the spirit of which goes totally contrary to your proposal.
What I propose would merely add an additional cost for people who want to run these servers, not actually render it impossible to do so.
Why should I have to pay more to be able to VNC into my box at home? Why should I have to pay more to use VoIP? Why should I pay more to host a game of UT2k4? Why should I pay more so that my linux torrents download faster?
"Servers" or Incoming ports are for a hell of a lot more then "giving stuff away for free".
What you propose is to completely destroy a huge portion of the net's usefullness (ex: I troubleshoot PC problems remotely for my clients over VNC, all the time) to the average user, with no benifit to the user what so ever.
People would cancel their accounts with these "ISPs" so fast they'd need to hire extra staff to handle the calls. New ISPs that offered a REAL net connection at a reasonable rate would spring up to take their place.
"Don't use outlook or IE" - what the hell else can you do
Use Firefox and Thunderbird (+Sunbird if you need a calendar, most people don't)?
wow. Some of the videos blew me away..
I think in order to get a job doing real computer engineering, you need at least a masters degree (I only have BS and could not find such a job).
This is pretty much what I'm hearing from both my professors and folks I've talked to in industry.
I guess I haven't got much choice but to go to grad school.. just when I thought I saw the light at the end of the tunnel.
Because C is the link between ASM and Python.
There is no language quite like C.. I think the fact that while (*s++ = *t++); copies a string speaks for itself.
Then the school you went to sucked, I would have dropped out the day it happened.
My profs have never, ever had a problem with me going the extra mile.
If you want to program, get an EE or Computer Engineering degree instead of a CS degree.
:(
I wish somebody told me this 2.5 years ago when I started a Computer Engineering degree.
Now I'm looking for internships between my second to last and last year, and my choices are programming, writing technical liteature, programming, and software validation.
I had these crazy dreams of designing and building CPUs and other cool digital logic type stuff, but it looks like I'm going to end up a code monkey
RTFA:
In fact, Forest believes the scene will eventually go legit, and he's even started a company, called Jun Group, that uses the topsites to promote movies, musicians, and TV shows. "The topsites don't care where their files come from, as long as no one else has them," he says. Last summer Jun Group dropped a collection of live videos and MP3s from Steve Winwood on the topsites. "We got 2.9 million downloads," says Forest, "and album sales took off."
Those 2.9m downloads were of LEGIT, authorized-for-distribution content that "the scene" was used to spread. No "piracy" happened here.
Meanwhile, people with more powerful reasoning skills, understand that 2.9M infringements, do not and will not equate to 2.9M sales.
If every pirate shows the movie/show/etc.. to just *one* friend who buys it, then #download==#sales. You're completely forggetting about the most effective method of advertising possible: Word Of Mouth.
It's fuckwads like you with your "powerful reasoning skills" that run the **AAs, and will cause the collapse of the entertainment industry. Fuck you all, you've done it to yourselves. My only hope is that you shut the fuck up and stay the fuck out when the industry is reborn to take advantage of technology, not litigate gainst it.
The only information I have seen regarding SCO in Germany is that they have been enjoined from making claims regarding copyright violations without revealing more about the factual basis of the claims. While perhaps this is a positive in a case like SCO, it seems to me to be an indication that free-speach rights are pretty weak in Germany.
Please.. "Free speech" does not include the right to make allogations (with no factual basis) for the purposes of spreading FUD. The judge in Germany saw through their scheme, and told them to cram it up their cramhole.
I do not think that the loss of television viewing is something that should be mourned though.
... always watching us, and you don't want to upset it.
Shhh...don't say things like that. The TV is watching us
I've clicked one one before realzing it was a fake as well.. IIRC, it was something to the tune of www.paypaI.com
What really bugs me are those ones you get for "major american banks".. nevermind that I'm Canadian.
Programs have internal limits. That's kosher.
.. wonderful function.
remalloc()
But seriously, I completely agree with your points. I don't know if going around overwriting old data is the correct way to go about it, but there should have at least been a check.. if you assume a max of 32k transactions, you'd sure as hell better check that assertion is true, and tell the user if it fails. Bonus points for telling the user if it ever comes close to failing.
But hey.. it's 15 year old highly-specialized software, I bet the code was a result of some late-night hacking session.
With all due respect to Pope Gregory XIII, he can bite me.
The end is at the end.
The end is not at the beginning.
ISO 8601 says that weeks start on Monday, and ISO carries much more authority then some pope.
The /Q just skips bad sector checks (these take 99% of the formatting time). Your data is still recoverable either way (unformat).
/Q. It works because the bad sector check is done first, and this is the "progress meter". If you abort the bad sector check at 99%, no harm is done.
If you're gonna do the Ctrl+Break thing, it does work, but do NOT use
It's important to note that if the chances of impact are 1 in 45, then the chances that future observations will exclude the possibility impact are 44 in 45.
No. "Asteroid hitting Earth" is a Bernoulli event. It hits, or it does not hit. Our current estimates are P[hit] = 1/45. P[miss] = 44/45. However, we do not know what our next estimate is going to be, and the current estimate doesn't (in a strictly propabilistic sense) tell us anything about future estimates.
The two events "asteroid hits us" and "we can never exclude the possibility of it hitting us" are equivalent: the first happens if and only if the second happens. Therefore the two events have the same probability.
"we can never exclude the possibility of it hitting us" isn't an event.. I think the event you meant is "asteroid doesn't miss us".
there is no reassuring "extremely high" probability that future observations will correct the number downward.
Well.. no. There is some 3D region in space through which scientists figured out the asteroid will pass through. The "propability of a hit" is nothing but the ratio of the volume of earth contained inside this region to the total size of the region.
Now, as we have more information, we can shrink the size of this region. Since the parts we're going to be cutting off first are the outsides of the region (as we get better readings), it's fairly logical to assume that since the region is going to shrink around us, the propability of us getting hit is going to go UP at first, as is happening now.
Eventually however, we will (hopefully) start to be able to remove parts of the earth from the region, at which time the ratio will begin to go down. Eventually, when the region no longer contains the earth, the chance of being hit is 0.
Maybe this will finally empower new developers to make an OS that really does something instead of being a cool "proof of concept" thing.
Yeah, Linux and *BSD are just cool "proof of concepts".. nobody uses them for any actual work.
What if the .torrents were put on a P2P network? The files are no longer very big so the scaling issues are not that important. If people are worried that the MPAA are going to go after people who store .torrents, why not encrypt them, or spread them between two/three "buddy" hosts...
.torrent hosts, that's either shitty reporting or a diversion. They're going after big trackers.
.torrents anonymously isn't the problem.. they're such little files, you can usually cram them just about anywhere (DNS maybe even?). Storing and distributing peer lists is the real problem.
The MPAA is not just going after big
Storing and distributing
BT isn't a p2p network in the conventional sense, it's a network of p2p networks. Each "torrent" is a p2p network on it's own, self contained and independent of any other torrent.
This p2p network needs a way to keep track of it's members, and hereing comes the tracker. The tracker's primary duty is to deliver random subset of the peerlist to peers when they request it.
So, an effective tracker must
1) Know of -all- the peer's IPs in the swarm
2) Be easy to contact
3) Give away peer's IPs to anyone who asks
Thus, BT as it currently sits (a quick, efficient way to offload some server bandwidth onto users) is not suited for illegal content: That same thing which makes it good/strong/fast (the trackers) is what makes it easy to litigate.
PS: In BT, pieces very, very rarely arrive from a single source.. I don't think this has stopped anyone from litigating.
Agreed. I've switched from OE to TB few months ago (when the 1.0-pres came out, and people were encouraged to try to import their old mail and submit bugs) and since it imported my mail flawlessly (almost, I had folder names with / in them that I had to rename first) I've never looked back.
And, I got the pleasure of un-installing Popfile.. good program, but hogs memory needlessly.
Governmental corruption and the religion of the population are not directly correlated.
Relly? Have you looked at what's going on in the USA lately, in the name of God? It's turned into a case of Christian God (us) vs Islamic God (them). And if you're not with "us", you're with "them", and you have no rights.
This is exactly how totalitarian regimes are born; the war between Eurasia and Oceania has already begun.. Orwell was right, just 20 years off.
Russia is corrupt becuase their gov't are puppets, the police are underpaid (read: bribed) and the country is run by organized crime syndicates.. not because they're "Christian".
Cable TV over the Phone Line.. not impressive.
Wake me up when they have Phone Lines over Cable T...errm..oh..