Holy hell! When did they start doing this? I had a cable modem in Edmonton up until this past April (moved to Ontario to do an internship:)... IIRC, it was a flat rate payment plan. Was this with a particular company? I was with Shaw, so maybe they weren't instituting this... Or maybe I just wasn't using enough bandwidth...:)
Actually, from the look of the article, it seems the parents were going to avoid having a child, although they wanted another one, due to the one in four chance of a new child developing Fanconi anemia. The advent of preimplantation diagnosis let them have another child, as they wanted, and avoid abortion (in the case of an affected embryo), which they apparently take issue with. From the comments the parents were making, it seems the use of cord blood for their daughter was just a pleasant bonus of having another child that wasn't affected by the disorder... now, I don't know if I actually believe that, but the point is they wanted another child, so I don't think the the issue you raise is really there. If the child, ten years down the road, asks "Did you have me to save my sister?", the parents will say "No, we wanted another child, and the fact that we could have you and you could save your sister is a wonderful miracle"... *shrug*
Actually, no, you don't. I know, it shocks me, too... I mean, MS giving away information about their APIs for free?!? But yes, it's true. You can check out msdn.microsoft.com yourself, if you like.:)
Actually, link-local IP addresses can be used for a variety of purposes. For example, say we're in a wireless environment where we wish to configure a device using DHCP. In such an environment, we may not have the ability to broadcast messages to the wireless device (due to limitations at layer 2). So it becomes necessary to provide a valid temporary layer 3 address before requesting configuration parameters from the network.
Actually, they didn't buy anything. This range is registered with IANA as the link-local IP address range, from which a machine can assign itself a temporary IP, for use during configuration. The range for that is 169.254/16. The definition for how this range is used in IPv4 as part of an ad hoc network is located here. It's also used in IPv6 in RFC 2462.
Err, no... this is system virtualization. The x86 code runs on the actual processor using the (limited) CPU virtualization support in the x86, and plex86 is used to fill the gaps, trapping interrupts, access to ports, and lots of other stuff (since the x86 CPU virtualization stuff is crap, AFAIK). The key point is that it's not *emulating* anything in the traditional sense (ie, there's no CPU-level emulation going on here).
Actually, there's another really good reason why it's hard to develop open source software on a platform with closed source tools... unless your target users/hackers have the same tools you have (and thus paid the bucks) the source code it useless... and this greatly reduces the number of people who can make use of the code.
Well, for people with less than 128 megs of RAM, Wine is a pretty nice alternative for running Windows apps under Linux... granted, it's still a pig, but it doesn't need 128 megs.:) Plus, it's a LOT faster, since there isn't a full-blown hardware abstraction layer. I'd have to say Wine definitely has a future, esp. in the area of migrating legacy apps to Linux.
Ahem to that! I'm a lower-middle class University student, and the only reason I even have a 'puter is through scholarships and working damn hard... like I can drop $800 any time I want for a new system. Hell, I need that cash for rent!:)
Perhaps I should have been more specific. Transactions, combined with two-phase locking (at least, that's the most common method used) are required (or, should I say, highly beneficial) in ensuring database consistency. You see, transactions, combined with two-phase locking, allows a database to execute transactions (atomic groups of steps) in an order which prevents the database from entering an inconsistent state. Thus, by examining the steps in a transaction, the database can determine if any two transactions are or are not serializable. If they aren't serializable, that means there's no order in which they can be executed where the database ends up in a consistent state, and the database can send back an error to the client. This is something mySQL simply can't do.
So, in the end, you're right in saying that locking and transactions are, in and of themselves, orthogonal. However, mySQL needs to support them both, for example with two-phase locking, to really be an industrial-strength database. At least, IMHO.:) Of course, that all depends on whether or not the developers of mySQL intended for it to fit into those types of roles, or if they meant for it to work in areas where speed was the larger factor (ie, websites). After all, some would say you should choose the tool to fit the job.
Ooooh, I'd definitely disagree on this one. As an example, when it comes to writing code which tracks inventories, etc, for online purchasing, it's VERY necessary to have transactions. After all, what happens if two people try to buy the same item, of which there is only one left in stock? You get a phantom read (or was this one a fuzzy read... I can't remember:). The only way to avoid this sort of thing is to support proper, serializable transactions, or to do what you'd do with mySQL... lock the table.:) The point is, any time you have a high number of concurrent database accesses, some of which include updates, you definitely need transactions (or more stuff at the application level to prevent this sort of thing, which is what you need to do with mySQL).
I can definitely agree with you on this one. Without proper transaction support, a LOT more stuff has to go on at the application level, which is rather annoying for us coders.:)
Anyway, IIRC, the mySQL devel team is working to incorporate transactions into mySQL. In fact, correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the latest version support BDB (Berkley DB) tables, which support proper transactions?
More than likely, they (referring to those doing the agressive filtering) don't really give a royal crap what they kill as long as the Napster / Gnutella packates aren't getting through.
Ah, but, for this to really be a threat (which some folks are suggesting) there would have to be wide adoption of this (or similar) technologies. However, I suspect most ISPs would be a little leary when they find out that the blocking software prevents download of the latest version of Netscape/IE/your browser of choice, causing a zillion service calls by the customers, and resultant loss of business once the people find out the reason they can't download the latest version of their favorite browser.:)
Which, again, returns to the idea of encryption to hide the contents of a packet. Or designing a protocol to look like an existing protocol that's highly accepted. There's always some way around.:)
And I, like you, am skeptical that they can really do what they claim. I'm curious what kind of heuristics a software package like this would need to employ to quickly and effectively block packets with a low error rate. After all, the failure of various software packages to effectively classify network flows based on content (for the purpose of QoS) shows how difficult it is to do something like this. Simple pattern matching ain't gonna do the job, and more complex heuristics would still be error prone, and less efficient. How do you identify a Napster packet from any other, which simply contains two 16-bit shorts with a command and length, and a payload? Search for two sets of 16-bit shorts at the start of a packet which are within a given range? What happens if I happen to be transferring a binary file that looks like that? Do I get blocked? In other words, this ain't an easy job.:)
Since no one seems to have mentioned this 8 bit system (my first and only 8 bit system:) I figured I'd make mention of SMS Power, which is a really nice SMS site with a LOT of great information, especially for potential emulator others and ROM hackers/coders. They have, AFAIK, the only SMS developer's section with a decent collection of docs, plus a forum for discussion.
Plus, for those of you like myself who want to try a hand at homebrewing ROMs but need tools, I'd take a look at z80-asm (search Freshmeat:). It's a decent, free z80 assembler which, used in conjunction with cpp, does a nice job.
Slashdot Mirror
Holy hell! When did they start doing this? I had a cable modem in Edmonton up until this past April (moved to Ontario to do an internship :)... IIRC, it was a flat rate payment plan. Was this with a particular company? I was with Shaw, so maybe they weren't instituting this... Or maybe I just wasn't using enough bandwidth... :)
shift+delete == really delete
FYI... :)
Actually, from the look of the article, it seems the parents were going to avoid having a child, although they wanted another one, due to the one in four chance of a new child developing Fanconi anemia. The advent of preimplantation diagnosis let them have another child, as they wanted, and avoid abortion (in the case of an affected embryo), which they apparently take issue with. From the comments the parents were making, it seems the use of cord blood for their daughter was just a pleasant bonus of having another child that wasn't affected by the disorder... now, I don't know if I actually believe that, but the point is they wanted another child, so I don't think the the issue you raise is really there. If the child, ten years down the road, asks "Did you have me to save my sister?", the parents will say "No, we wanted another child, and the fact that we could have you and you could save your sister is a wonderful miracle"... *shrug*
Actually, no, you don't. I know, it shocks me, too... I mean, MS giving away information about their APIs for free?!? But yes, it's true. You can check out msdn.microsoft.com yourself, if you like. :)
Yeah, ditto... :)+
Actually, link-local IP addresses can be used for a variety of purposes. For example, say we're in a wireless environment where we wish to configure a device using DHCP. In such an environment, we may not have the ability to broadcast messages to the wireless device (due to limitations at layer 2). So it becomes necessary to provide a valid temporary layer 3 address before requesting configuration parameters from the network.
Actually, they didn't buy anything. This range is registered with IANA as the link-local IP address range, from which a machine can assign itself a temporary IP, for use during configuration. The range for that is 169.254/16. The definition for how this range is used in IPv4 as part of an ad hoc network is located here. It's also used in IPv6 in RFC 2462.
Err, no... this is system virtualization. The x86 code runs on the actual processor using the (limited) CPU virtualization support in the x86, and plex86 is used to fill the gaps, trapping interrupts, access to ports, and lots of other stuff (since the x86 CPU virtualization stuff is crap, AFAIK). The key point is that it's not *emulating* anything in the traditional sense (ie, there's no CPU-level emulation going on here).
Actually, there's another really good reason why it's hard to develop open source software on a platform with closed source tools... unless your target users/hackers have the same tools you have (and thus paid the bucks) the source code it useless... and this greatly reduces the number of people who can make use of the code.
Well, for people with less than 128 megs of RAM, Wine is a pretty nice alternative for running Windows apps under Linux... granted, it's still a pig, but it doesn't need 128 megs. :) Plus, it's a LOT faster, since there isn't a full-blown hardware abstraction layer. I'd have to say Wine definitely has a future, esp. in the area of migrating legacy apps to Linux.
Ahem to that! I'm a lower-middle class University student, and the only reason I even have a 'puter is through scholarships and working damn hard... like I can drop $800 any time I want for a new system. Hell, I need that cash for rent! :)
So, in the end, you're right in saying that locking and transactions are, in and of themselves, orthogonal. However, mySQL needs to support them both, for example with two-phase locking, to really be an industrial-strength database. At least, IMHO. :) Of course, that all depends on whether or not the developers of mySQL intended for it to fit into those types of roles, or if they meant for it to work in areas where speed was the larger factor (ie, websites). After all, some would say you should choose the tool to fit the job.
Ooooh, I'd definitely disagree on this one. As an example, when it comes to writing code which tracks inventories, etc, for online purchasing, it's VERY necessary to have transactions. After all, what happens if two people try to buy the same item, of which there is only one left in stock? You get a phantom read (or was this one a fuzzy read... I can't remember :). The only way to avoid this sort of thing is to support proper, serializable transactions, or to do what you'd do with mySQL... lock the table. :) The point is, any time you have a high number of concurrent database accesses, some of which include updates, you definitely need transactions (or more stuff at the application level to prevent this sort of thing, which is what you need to do with mySQL).
Anyway, IIRC, the mySQL devel team is working to incorporate transactions into mySQL. In fact, correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the latest version support BDB (Berkley DB) tables, which support proper transactions?
Ah, but, for this to really be a threat (which some folks are suggesting) there would have to be wide adoption of this (or similar) technologies. However, I suspect most ISPs would be a little leary when they find out that the blocking software prevents download of the latest version of Netscape/IE/your browser of choice, causing a zillion service calls by the customers, and resultant loss of business once the people find out the reason they can't download the latest version of their favorite browser. :)
And I, like you, am skeptical that they can really do what they claim. I'm curious what kind of heuristics a software package like this would need to employ to quickly and effectively block packets with a low error rate. After all, the failure of various software packages to effectively classify network flows based on content (for the purpose of QoS) shows how difficult it is to do something like this. Simple pattern matching ain't gonna do the job, and more complex heuristics would still be error prone, and less efficient. How do you identify a Napster packet from any other, which simply contains two 16-bit shorts with a command and length, and a payload? Search for two sets of 16-bit shorts at the start of a packet which are within a given range? What happens if I happen to be transferring a binary file that looks like that? Do I get blocked? In other words, this ain't an easy job. :)
Plus, for those of you like myself who want to try a hand at homebrewing ROMs but need tools, I'd take a look at z80-asm (search Freshmeat :). It's a decent, free z80 assembler which, used in conjunction with cpp, does a nice job.