# I send you 64 Kb of data. # You tell me if my guess (taken as a 64k digit binary number) is high or low
1. If I'm right, we move on to the next block of data
2. If I'm wrong, I alter my guess based on randomness and binary search (both efficient and crazy at the same time) based on if my guess was too high or low... and I guess again
There we go. I used very little download bandwidth
If your guess is right 1/65536 of the time on average, and you download 1 bit to verify the guess, you'll end up downloading 64Kb for every 64Kb of data.
You can't game the system. If you are guessing correctly more often than 1/65536, that means you already know something about the data and you would not need to download the entire 64Kb.
In a nutshell, you can't use upload bandwidth in lieu of download bandwidth.
Actually I think what causes it is people unwilling to pick up a phone or just go and speak to the person if they're in the same office. As you point out email isn't really for chatting, so when people use it for such it can get messy.
Phones and instant messaging interrupt the recipient. Sending out a "Drinks at XYZ tonight?" email to five coworkers is not worth disrupting five people with phone calls who could otherwise check their email on their own schedules.
Using a phone when it is not necessary is even worse in many cases.
The safeguards on the US nuclear arsenal are also DRM. They've worked for a long time....
Actually, this "security" was a complete technological failure.... The Strategic Air Command (SAC) in Omaha quietly decided to set the "locks" to all zeros in order to circumvent this safeguard. During the early to mid-1970s, during my stint as a Minuteman launch officer, they still had not been changed. Our launch checklist in fact instructed us, the firing crew, to double-check the locking panel in our underground launch bunker to ensure that no digits other than zero had been inadvertently dialed into the panel. SAC remained far less concerned about unauthorized launches than about the potential of these safeguards to interfere with the implementation of wartime launch orders. And so the "secret unlock code" during the height of the nuclear crises of the Cold War remained constant at OOOOOOOO....
It's like talking to a broken record: I repeat; Open sourcing is the equivalent of selling the source for zero dollars. Whether you can open source and/or whether you can on-sell all depend on the wording of the parent licenses. A blanket pronouncement like "can't open source it" is nonsense equivalent to a blanket pronouncement saying "can't sell it".
That is incorrect. The right to distribute and the right to relicense are different.
For example, consider a typical site license for software. You purchase the right to copy and distribute the software within a certain group or location. You can even charge the recipients for the software. You cannot, however, relicense that software to the license of your choice.
For another example, consider a publishing deal. A publisher can purchase the exclusive right to sell a work for a certain duration or within a certain geography. Under that type of contract, nobody else, not even the author, has the right to distribute the work within the same location or timeframe. The publisher cannot, however, decide to place that work into the public domain.
Relicensing rights and publishing rights are not the same thing and are frequently separated. Open-sourcing is not at all "the equivalent of selling the source for zero dollars"
In summary: Denmark is that bit that juts up to the north of Germany and has islands that stretch to Sweden. The Dutch live in the Netherlands, just north of Belgium and due east of East Anglia in England.
Whoosh.
The Dutch have had much success with land reclamation and floodwater management. GP was suggesting that the Danes should attempt the same. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delta_Works
Just for the record; I'm not proclaiming any great knowledge in this area.
I just wonder if the business model won't be fruitful at first and slowly fade into non-existence.
The allure of low priced PCs for the neophyte is a great one but one of two things are likely to happen: They'll either find out that they want more and end up willing to spend more and probably choose Windows for the software support or they'll find that the machine suits their purposes and latch onto them for a larger than normal span of time and repeat customers will be next to nil.
I've found that people who pinch a penny when buying hardware are normally not good business for vendors. They'll make a machine last to their dying day.
So while the initial repsonce is going to be great but don't expect to see lots of these people as return customers in the next few years.
The above opinion brought to you by the IBM Corporation, circa 1975
The obvious reason to build on a ship is that the cost of the real estate needed to build a data center the size of a cargo ship in downtown SF would be astronomical.
At ~$20K/hour, using a berth in a major shipping port isn't exactly cheap. TANSTAAFL still applies.
One last thing, the last thing I want on computers I manage is students downloading and installing whatever programs they think they want onto computers. If they want to use a program they need to request it through the proper channels. If I caught a student installing software on a computer without permission, I'd recommend they be expelled, regardless of what they were installing. Its not their computer.
Would you recommend expulsion for a student that brought in some insect to mount on a slide to look at under a microscope? It is, after all, not their equipment to play with as they see fit.
High school lab computers are there for learning and exploration. If you have them locked down like a supermarket checkout kiosk or bank teller terminal, you may as well not have a lab in the first place.
As an IT admin, it's your job to make sure the computers you administer are configured for the role they serve. In this case, it's your job to make sure the students cannot intentionally or inadvertently interfere with the education of other students. Specifically, students should not be able to: -Disable the machine beyond a point from which it easily restored to a working state by a teacher or other students -Degrade the network performance to a point that affects other school activities -Put the school in legal jeopardy
A competent administrator can accomplish all of the above without locking the machine down so far that it is about as educational as a doorstop. Draconian AUPs with dismissal upon first infraction are appropriate in many places, but certainly not in a school.
Nuclear power leaves people's safety in the hands of distant, nameless technicians. People don't like that. They will never like it--at most they may tolerate it or head-in-sand ignore it. While it is possible for a nuclear plant not to kill people, surely you do agree that radioactive material is dangerous.
Rewriting simply because it was written external to the company isn't a good thing. Rewriting because it was written external to the company and you're not certain of your company's license to legally make use of the code is an *entirely* different thing.
It's also a waste of time. Rewriting code that you have looked at will raise the legal fees for both parties, but it will not fix the violation.
Career advice: Talk to your manager. Let him or her know what is going on. If there is a disagreement, document it, write a CYA memo if you are worth more as a scapegoat than a programmer, and move on. Show a little trust in your co-workers. If you can't do that, your best career move is to get a new job.
Why should drugs be illegal in the first place? Shouldn't I have the right to screw up my life any damned way I please?
If you've set aside some money and purchased insurance for your health care, funeral, existing debts, and the care of any dependents you may have, sure, be my guest. Until then? Fuck, no. You don't have a right to make a mess that others will need to clean up.
Generally speaking, the people who have the foresight to plan for their future are the ones who don't get caught. Consider the current system to be a metric of maturity and discretion.
Motor Vehicle 36,676 1 out of 7,700 1.3 deaths per 100 million vehicle miles c,d Poisoning 15,206 1 out of 18,700 Work Related 5,800 1 out of 49,000 4.3 deaths per 100,000 workers Large Trucks 5,150 1 out of 55,000 2.5 deaths per 100 million vehicle miles Pedestrian 4,846 1 out of 58,000 Drowning 3,409 1 out of 83,500 Fires 3,312 1 out of 86,000 Motorcycles 3,112 1 out of 91,500 31.3 deaths per 100 million vehicle miles Railroads 931 1 out of 306,000 1.3 deaths per million train miles Firearms 779 1 out of 366,000 Recreational Boating 714 1 out of 399,000 5.6 deaths per 100,000 registered boats Bicycles 695 1 out of 410,000 Electric Current 410 1 out of 695,000 Air Carriers 138a 1 out of 2,067,000 1.9 deaths per 100 million aircraft miles Flood 58 1 out of 4,928,000 Tornado 57 1 out of 5,015,000 Lightning 47 1 out of 6,061,000
When we are getting peppered with ads during games, I fell pretty cheated that there wasn't a discount on the price
Adjusted for inflation, games are cheaper now than they have ever been. Adjusted for inflation, games are more expensive to produce than they have ever been. Even accounting for industry growth and inflation, the per-unit production cost of games is higher than it has ever been.
And as I understand it, the USA does not like the French due to opposition to the Iraq invasion, cheese-jealousy, etc. Hence 'freedom fries' and so forth.
Remember, after 40 years of Cold War, Russian Dressing was still Russian Dressing.
It's not that Americans don't like the French; it's that they don't respect them.
The difference is, 9/11 attaches an emotional impact to meaningless numbers, while overuse of the word "fuck" removes the emotional impact from a word.
You are mistaken. The phrase "9/11" does not convey any emotion; it is simply a common descriptor for an event. It may instill emotion in the receiver, but by itself conveys no more emotion than the phrase "Battle of Hastings". The phrase "9/11" may even instill a vastly different emotion in the receiver than the sender attempts to impart. No matter how many times you say "9/11", its meaning will remain unchanged; it still refers to the exact same event every time.
Unlike normal descriptors, profanity actually changes its meaning with overuse or disuse and the list of words considered profane will necessarily mutate over time.
But what does any of this have to do with it being antisocial or not? Seems to me, if it generally has a negative impact, and you reduce the emotional impact, that's a socially good thing to do...
Profanity need not have a negative impact. An email from your boss that says something like, "Your sales demo fucking rocked!", is generally a positive thing. While it is important in the workplace to demonstrate the ability to restrain and direct one's emotions, it is pointless to assume we can be totally dispassionate. At certain times it can be appropriate and beneficial to express emotions using the tools of the language. Overusing profanity diminishes its value for others, which is why the overuse of it is antisocial. It's like littering. One more piece of trash won't change much, but it's still rude.
If they end up making more money off this album than if they had released it through traditional means I would say that would be an attractive means of distrobution.
There is also another very valuable lesson for the bands and labels to learn:
If an end user would rather get their content at no cost from a piracy website than get the same content at no cost from legitimate channels, then that means:
The label is offering an inferior product to the pirated version.
Whether it is service, selection, convenience, trust, or all of the above, the labels need to wake the fuck up and realize that only one thing will ever beat piracy, and that is quality...delivering a quality product every fucking step of the way. People simply will not shell out cash for anything less. No DRM. No PC-incompatible discs. No opt-out marketing bullshit.
Sell the product people want, how they want it, and when they want it, and you'll make money hand-over-fist. Look at iTunes.
Profanity is the linguistic crutch of a fucking ignoramus.
Profanity is simply a communications tool used to convey emotion directly instead of relying upon the receiver to interpret the words in the appropriate context. They are analogous to smileys used in email and chat; they're an extra communications channel.
Profanity is not antisocial. The overuse of profanity is antisocial. One can use the word "fifteen" as many times as necessary without diminishing its utility. Fifteen will still equal 15, no matter how many times you say it. On the other hand, the value of the word "fuck" lies in its emotional content. Every time that word is used, that content gets diluted for both the sender and receiver. When overused, the word becomes meaningless.
Profanity is simply another linguistic tool, and not using all the tools at one's disposal to communicate concisely and precisely is foolish. However, some tools dull faster than others, and the waste of perfectly good profanity through overuse and misuse is naturally offensive.
It's a nice case. Mine recently got its guts replaced for the umpteenth time in the past decade; it still houses my primary workstation. At (currently) $41 with free shipping, that's not a bad deal for a solid chassis.
The idea of an illegal copy of linux is kind of a paradox, isn't it?
Not at all.
Open source does not mean the software is free (as in beer). Open source does not mean you can redistribute the software without heeding the terms of the license.
Slashdot Mirror
a root password to a coworker
Damn...I wish we had some of those here. Sudo get me a sandwich indeed.
# I send you 64 Kb of data.
# You tell me if my guess (taken as a 64k digit binary number) is high or low
1. If I'm right, we move on to the next block of data
2. If I'm wrong, I alter my guess based on randomness and binary search (both efficient and crazy at the same time) based on if my guess was too high or low... and I guess again
There we go. I used very little download bandwidth
If your guess is right 1/65536 of the time on average, and you download 1 bit to verify the guess, you'll end up downloading 64Kb for every 64Kb of data.
You can't game the system. If you are guessing correctly more often than 1/65536, that means you already know something about the data and you would not need to download the entire 64Kb.
In a nutshell, you can't use upload bandwidth in lieu of download bandwidth.
Actually I think what causes it is people unwilling to pick up a phone or just go and speak to the person if they're in the same office. As you point out email isn't really for chatting, so when people use it for such it can get messy.
Phones and instant messaging interrupt the recipient. Sending out a "Drinks at XYZ tonight?" email to five coworkers is not worth disrupting five people with phone calls who could otherwise check their email on their own schedules.
Using a phone when it is not necessary is even worse in many cases.
The safeguards on the US nuclear arsenal are also DRM. They've worked for a long time....
... ...
Actually, this "security" was a complete technological failure.
The Strategic Air Command (SAC) in Omaha quietly decided to set the "locks" to all zeros in order to circumvent this safeguard. During the early to mid-1970s, during my stint as a Minuteman launch officer, they still had not been changed. Our launch checklist in fact instructed us, the firing crew, to double-check the locking panel in our underground launch bunker to ensure that no digits other than zero had been inadvertently dialed into the panel. SAC remained far less concerned about unauthorized launches than about the potential of these safeguards to interfere with the implementation of wartime launch orders. And so the "secret unlock code" during the height of the nuclear crises of the Cold War remained constant at OOOOOOOO.
http://www.cdi.org/blair/permissive-action-links.cfm
It's like talking to a broken record: I repeat; Open sourcing is the equivalent of selling the source for zero dollars. Whether you can open source and/or whether you can on-sell all depend on the wording of the parent licenses. A blanket pronouncement like "can't open source it" is nonsense equivalent to a blanket pronouncement saying "can't sell it".
That is incorrect. The right to distribute and the right to relicense are different.
For example, consider a typical site license for software. You purchase the right to copy and distribute the software within a certain group or location. You can even charge the recipients for the software. You cannot, however, relicense that software to the license of your choice.
For another example, consider a publishing deal. A publisher can purchase the exclusive right to sell a work for a certain duration or within a certain geography. Under that type of contract, nobody else, not even the author, has the right to distribute the work within the same location or timeframe. The publisher cannot, however, decide to place that work into the public domain.
Relicensing rights and publishing rights are not the same thing and are frequently separated. Open-sourcing is not at all "the equivalent of selling the source for zero dollars"
In summary: Denmark is that bit that juts up to the north of Germany and has islands that stretch to Sweden. The Dutch live in the Netherlands, just north of Belgium and due east of East Anglia in England.
Whoosh.
The Dutch have had much success with land reclamation and floodwater management. GP was suggesting that the Danes should attempt the same.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delta_Works
Loser.
Just for the record; I'm not proclaiming any great knowledge in this area.
I just wonder if the business model won't be fruitful at first and slowly fade into non-existence.
The allure of low priced PCs for the neophyte is a great one but one of two things are likely to happen: They'll either find out that they want more and end up willing to spend more and probably choose Windows for the software support or they'll find that the machine suits their purposes and latch onto them for a larger than normal span of time and repeat customers will be next to nil.
I've found that people who pinch a penny when buying hardware are normally not good business for vendors. They'll make a machine last to their dying day.
So while the initial repsonce is going to be great but don't expect to see lots of these people as return customers in the next few years.
The above opinion brought to you by the IBM Corporation, circa 1975
The obvious reason to build on a ship is that the cost of the real estate needed to build a data center the size of a cargo ship in downtown SF would be astronomical.
At ~$20K/hour, using a berth in a major shipping port isn't exactly cheap. TANSTAAFL still applies.
One last thing, the last thing I want on computers I manage is students downloading and installing whatever programs they think they want onto computers. If they want to use a program they need to request it through the proper channels. If I caught a student installing software on a computer without permission, I'd recommend they be expelled, regardless of what they were installing. Its not their computer.
Would you recommend expulsion for a student that brought in some insect to mount on a slide to look at under a microscope? It is, after all, not their equipment to play with as they see fit.
High school lab computers are there for learning and exploration. If you have them locked down like a supermarket checkout kiosk or bank teller terminal, you may as well not have a lab in the first place.
As an IT admin, it's your job to make sure the computers you administer are configured for the role they serve. In this case, it's your job to make sure the students cannot intentionally or inadvertently interfere with the education of other students. Specifically, students should not be able to:
-Disable the machine beyond a point from which it easily restored to a working state by a teacher or other students
-Degrade the network performance to a point that affects other school activities
-Put the school in legal jeopardy
A competent administrator can accomplish all of the above without locking the machine down so far that it is about as educational as a doorstop. Draconian AUPs with dismissal upon first infraction are appropriate in many places, but certainly not in a school.
Nuclear power leaves people's safety in the hands of distant, nameless technicians. People don't like that. They will never like it--at most they may tolerate it or head-in-sand ignore it. While it is possible for a nuclear plant not to kill people, surely you do agree that radioactive material is dangerous.
You get what you pay for.
Compare the salary of this job:
http://web.mit.edu/jobs/listings/02-0001076.html
With this job:
http://web.mit.edu/jobs/listings/02-0000056.html
Rewriting simply because it was written external to the company isn't a good thing. Rewriting because it was written external to the company and you're not certain of your company's license to legally make use of the code is an *entirely* different thing.
It's also a waste of time. Rewriting code that you have looked at will raise the legal fees for both parties, but it will not fix the violation.
Career advice: Talk to your manager. Let him or her know what is going on. If there is a disagreement, document it, write a CYA memo if you are worth more as a scapegoat than a programmer, and move on. Show a little trust in your co-workers. If you can't do that, your best career move is to get a new job.
At that time, they refused to say 'on security grounds' whether the information was encrypted.
...
That should read 'on job security grounds'
Why should drugs be illegal in the first place? Shouldn't I have the right to screw up my life any damned way I please?
If you've set aside some money and purchased insurance for your health care, funeral, existing debts, and the care of any dependents you may have, sure, be my guest. Until then? Fuck, no. You don't have a right to make a mess that others will need to clean up.
Generally speaking, the people who have the foresight to plan for their future are the ones who don't get caught. Consider the current system to be a metric of maturity and discretion.
The link provides that advice so you'll know what people mean when they use incorrect, made up words.
Words like Mebibytes and Tebibytes?
Data from the DOT:
Motor Vehicle 36,676 1 out of 7,700 1.3 deaths per 100 million vehicle miles c,d
Poisoning 15,206 1 out of 18,700
Work Related 5,800 1 out of 49,000 4.3 deaths per 100,000 workers
Large Trucks 5,150 1 out of 55,000 2.5 deaths per 100 million vehicle miles
Pedestrian 4,846 1 out of 58,000
Drowning 3,409 1 out of 83,500
Fires 3,312 1 out of 86,000
Motorcycles 3,112 1 out of 91,500 31.3 deaths per 100 million vehicle miles
Railroads 931 1 out of 306,000 1.3 deaths per million train miles
Firearms 779 1 out of 366,000
Recreational Boating 714 1 out of 399,000 5.6 deaths per 100,000 registered boats
Bicycles 695 1 out of 410,000
Electric Current 410 1 out of 695,000
Air Carriers 138a 1 out of 2,067,000 1.9 deaths per 100 million aircraft miles
Flood 58 1 out of 4,928,000
Tornado 57 1 out of 5,015,000
Lightning 47 1 out of 6,061,000
http://hazmat.dot.gov/riskmgmt/riskcompare.htm
When we are getting peppered with ads during games, I fell pretty cheated that there wasn't a discount on the price
Adjusted for inflation, games are cheaper now than they have ever been.
Adjusted for inflation, games are more expensive to produce than they have ever been.
Even accounting for industry growth and inflation, the per-unit production cost of games is higher than it has ever been.
How, exactly, are you being cheated?
And as I understand it, the USA does not like the French due to opposition to the Iraq invasion, cheese-jealousy, etc. Hence 'freedom fries' and so forth.
Remember, after 40 years of Cold War, Russian Dressing was still Russian Dressing.
It's not that Americans don't like the French; it's that they don't respect them.
The difference is, 9/11 attaches an emotional impact to meaningless numbers, while overuse of the word "fuck" removes the emotional impact from a word.
You are mistaken. The phrase "9/11" does not convey any emotion; it is simply a common descriptor for an event. It may instill emotion in the receiver, but by itself conveys no more emotion than the phrase "Battle of Hastings". The phrase "9/11" may even instill a vastly different emotion in the receiver than the sender attempts to impart. No matter how many times you say "9/11", its meaning will remain unchanged; it still refers to the exact same event every time.
Unlike normal descriptors, profanity actually changes its meaning with overuse or disuse and the list of words considered profane will necessarily mutate over time.
But what does any of this have to do with it being antisocial or not? Seems to me, if it generally has a negative impact, and you reduce the emotional impact, that's a socially good thing to do...
Profanity need not have a negative impact. An email from your boss that says something like, "Your sales demo fucking rocked!", is generally a positive thing. While it is important in the workplace to demonstrate the ability to restrain and direct one's emotions, it is pointless to assume we can be totally dispassionate. At certain times it can be appropriate and beneficial to express emotions using the tools of the language. Overusing profanity diminishes its value for others, which is why the overuse of it is antisocial. It's like littering. One more piece of trash won't change much, but it's still rude.
If they end up making more money off this album than if they had released it through traditional means I would say that would be an attractive means of distrobution.
There is also another very valuable lesson for the bands and labels to learn:
If an end user would rather get their content at no cost from a piracy website than get the same content at no cost from legitimate channels, then that means:
The label is offering an inferior product to the pirated version.
Whether it is service, selection, convenience, trust, or all of the above, the labels need to wake the fuck up and realize that only one thing will ever beat piracy, and that is quality...delivering a quality product every fucking step of the way. People simply will not shell out cash for anything less. No DRM. No PC-incompatible discs. No opt-out marketing bullshit.
Sell the product people want, how they want it, and when they want it, and you'll make money hand-over-fist. Look at iTunes.
Profanity is the linguistic crutch of a fucking ignoramus.
Profanity is simply a communications tool used to convey emotion directly instead of relying upon the receiver to interpret the words in the appropriate context. They are analogous to smileys used in email and chat; they're an extra communications channel.
Profanity is not antisocial. The overuse of profanity is antisocial. One can use the word "fifteen" as many times as necessary without diminishing its utility. Fifteen will still equal 15, no matter how many times you say it. On the other hand, the value of the word "fuck" lies in its emotional content. Every time that word is used, that content gets diluted for both the sender and receiver. When overused, the word becomes meaningless.
Profanity is simply another linguistic tool, and not using all the tools at one's disposal to communicate concisely and precisely is foolish. However, some tools dull faster than others, and the waste of perfectly good profanity through overuse and misuse is naturally offensive.
The case looks like a Supermicro SC750
http://arstechnica.com/reviews/1298/sc750a.html
It's a nice case. Mine recently got its guts replaced for the umpteenth time in the past decade; it still houses my primary workstation. At (currently) $41 with free shipping, that's not a bad deal for a solid chassis.
The idea of an illegal copy of linux is kind of a paradox, isn't it?
Not at all.
Open source does not mean the software is free (as in beer). Open source does not mean you can redistribute the software without heeding the terms of the license.
Did you know that there is a good deal of evidence that the western renaissance was started using Islamic knowledge taken from libraries in spain?
"If I have seen further than others, it is because I have stood on the shoulders of giants." --Issac Newton
As opposed to a Spoonerism of Hairy Hard-on?