This is very similar to the problems I had back when everything was based on a mainframe and terminals. What do you do when THE computer is down? Here's some ideas that worked, then, and some others that I've found helpful, now.
Blame it on the computer.:^) If something needs to be done on the computer, and it's not running, then there's not much I can do about it.
Ask for help. See if your employer can bring some additional pressure to bear on the [phone] company.
Do off-line work. I'd do the stuff that kept getting put off until "later".
Go to the library, internet cafe, Starbucks, Kinko's, or any place else you can think of which has internet access available.
Get a business line and ask your company to pay for it. I know, residential rates are cheaper, but if it's being used for a business purpose, and you NEED it to be there, then it's a cost of doing business. Let your employer make the choice, AND BEAR THE CONSEQUENCES OF THAT DECISION. If they want to do it on the cheap, no guarantees; if they are willing to pay for the business line, then uptime assurances will be much better.
Get a second means of internet access (satellite, cable, dsl, dial-up). It may not be ideal, but some connectivity is better than none. Again, get them to agree to pay for it in advance.
Work locally. Make phone calls (using 2nd line) and instead of entering data into computer forms, write it down on a piece of paper. Key it in later.
So far as I know, Murphy's Law has not yet been repealed. Expect things to go wrong. Come up with contingencies. Do what you can. (And if you can't do anything, take a vacation and make the most of it!)
If you are not already telecommuting, and are thinking of starting, be sure to discuss these issues with your employer BEFORE YOU START!
I was fortunate enough to learn a second human language (German) in high school AFTER I had learned a couple computer languages. I had already gained experience in learning different grammars and vocabularies in simple (computer) languages before delving into another human language.
My German teacher stressed often that we were NOT to translate the German into English (my first language) to understand it. Let the mind THINK in German. I am so grateful for that exhortation!
Since then, I've programmed in about 20 other languages and spent two years testing a compiler, too. I often found myself thinking about how I thought in those different languages. Though I can't begin to explain the details to anyone, I came to an awareness that I had developed a meta-language of abstractions of concepts. (Analagous to the idea that all squares are rectangles, but not all rectangles are squares.)
While I was testing that compiler, I happened upon something that utterly fascinated me: translations of gibberish in English into other languages! That is, "Jabberwocky" by Lewis Carroll (Charles Lutwidge Dodgson). There is no possible literal translation, and yet when I read the German translation of it, I was amazed at how it had captured the "sense" of the poem -- rhyme, meter, even imagery! None other that Douglas R. Hofstadter wrote a lucid and illuminating piece on Translations of Jabberwocky -- it's a MUST READ!
For more fun, check out Jabberwocky Variations which contains links to translations in 29 different languages and 23 Parodies, too!
Automatically applying patches is NOT a solution! There are countless stories where the applying of patches caused formerly working software to crash.(*)
One major advantage of OSS vs Commercial software is the availability of the source code. Another major benefit, but less well recognized, is the visibility of REPORTED DEFECTS. Prior to obtaining an OSS application, say on sourceforge, I can peruse the bug list and get a complete list of reported bugs. What's the chances I can see the complete list of reported defects in, say, Microsoft Office?
Okay, why not just have a law passed that requires commercial software developers to make all reported bugs publically visible? Ain't gonna happen; political contributions and lobbying efforts would squash that in a heartbeat.
BUT, there's another approach. Don't use LEGAL requirements -- make it a MARKET requirement.
In other words, consider these two scenarios when making a recommendation for two different software packages:
This commercial package has these features and an undisclosed list of reported bugs. When bugs are discovered, we have to wait for the vendor to create a fix.
This OSS package has these features, too, but here's a complete list of all reported bugs. Further, whenever any new bugs are discovered, I can find out about it immediately, and we can fix the code ourselves.
In short, software will always have bugs -- just as OSS makes the code available, we can use market forces to trumpet the same visibility of the known (and future) bugs.
(*) Footnote: Feature vs Bug... many years ago I worked for 2+ years in testing a COBOL compiler that was being upgraded to support the latest standard. The version that was already out in the field was rife with bugs. Several customers were worried that we were going to fix some bugs they depended on! Though non-standard code, they had developed workarounds and used them extensively -- fixing the bugs in the compiler would break their programs!
There's a big difference between stating conclusions and stating observations.
Consider the difference between these two examples:
Example 1: "Joe Developer is a tremendous asset who has a great mastery of technology and is sure to be a powerful resource wherever he works."
Example 2: "I worked with Joe Developer on a technically challenging project with intense time pressures to get the product to market. On a number of occasions, I saw him not only detect omissions in the specifications, but he also worked with management and sales to obtain clarification. There were several times when we worked late into the night to help get a product release completed on time. I enjoyed working with him as I found his work ethic and sense of humor were real assets on this project.; I would like to work with him again in the future. "
In the second example, I'm sharing my observations based on my OWN experiences -- I'm making NO statements as to his suitability on a different project or at a later date. In other words "This has been my experience." Leave it to the potential new employer to draw his OWN conclusions.
BTW, I've found this works well in many other areas besides just references. At least, that's been MY experience!;^)
Need some more details to really answer your query.
OS? What operating system do you need?
Windows? If so, which one(s)? 9x, NT, 2K, XP, ??
Linux? Which one(s) RedHat (5.2,6.x,7.x)
Unix Solaris? Other?
Hardware x86? Sun? Other?
Content? Static pages? Dynamically generated?
DBMS? Do you need a database? Access? MySQL? Oracle? Etc.
Applications/Tools? PHP? Cold Fusion? ASP? Perl?
E-Mail? Do you need to support e-mail? How many addresses do you need?
Budget?What are you willing to pay?
Bandwidth needs/limits? Your DSL line might be able to handle average loads, but what about peak loads? What happens if your line goes down? Is it important to you to have multiple separate pipes onto the internet?
Current Problems? You mention having problems with the current hosting company... What problems are you having now?
I've had some success with myhosting.com which offers a simple $9.95/month package with unlimited bandwidth and 50 MB of storage. But, it's a windows-based platform and I'm looking for a Linux web hosting solution onto which I can move my site. I've done some googling, but can't tell much about the quality of the providers I've found. Besides, I've got this nagging thought that I'd pick some company, get the site set up, and have them go bamkrupt on me.:(
Can anyone recommend an impartial web site that rates and/or compares the various web hosting providers?
I can see applications for this beyond just the mass market. My first thought would be for carrying additioanl voice circuits over a T1 line. (Say, for carryting voice traffic between two locations in a large company.)
A T1 line suports 24 circuits, each of which has IIRC 64Kbps (ignoring RBS, etc.) Whatever. Each of these circuits can support one conversation. Using this technology, several more conversations could be carried on one circuit. (Their web site states 8Kbits for high-quality voice; 4Kbits for intelligible voice.) Even using the 8Kbit rate, that means 8 conversations could be carried on one voice circuit.
The result? A single T1 could carry 192 conversations instead of just 24. Or, put another way, get 8 T1's of voice capacity for the price of just one T1. At anywhere from $600-$1000 per T1, that adds up really fast.
Now, how long would it be until the phone company decides to replace POTS circuits with one of these? Dial-up users would find their modems capped at 8Kbits? Blech!
Question: If this idea is viable, why don't ISPs implement it, too? For example, if AOL used this technique on a few of its dial-up (or cable) IP addresses, they could potentially make quite an impact. Futher, they could apply this technique across each of their address blocks. They could also rotate through the address block the particular addresses which act as the honeypot.
Now imagine that AT&T, Earthlink, MSN, and other ISPs implemented this, too, that should put a HUGE DENT in spamming.
Granted, this would chew up bandwidth on their network, but delivering spam chews it up, too.
Please, if there are mistakes in this, don't mod me down but instead point out what ISPs COULD DO to make this work. Thanks!
That's right, they don't set a root password, and seem to expect users will be running as root right from the start. That's surely not the best way to introduce a newbie into best practices.
Let the students burn the CDs themselves. Just set up a server (ala napster), tell the students to download the lectures. Then, if the students actually want to burn them to CD, they're free to do so (set upa FAQ, if need be).
First off here's a simplification that anyone can try. In my high school physics class (many years ago;-) when we were studying waves, one of our lab experiments was to go out into the tiled-floor hallway. With the help of a lab partner, we'd stretch out a slinky along the floor. We experimented with creating standing waves of different periods. This permitted experiments in the horizontal and longitudinal axes (though not in the vertical, which the sliiiiiinky also supports). So, try it at home!
Secondly, I have a suggestion concerning the tendency of the sliiiiiiiiiiinky to get tangled onto itself that was often mentioned in the article. Wouldn't an initial tensioning of the sliiiiiiinky reduce or event prevent that from happening? I'm thinking the use of some cords, strings, or bungie cords being attached to the ends of the sliiiinky and whose other ends would be attached to the endmost vertical support poles. The downside, I would expect, is that the wave would move more quickly down the length of the sliiiiinky.
I had the same thought about using a laptop, but in the original posting, there is also this:
I'm going to leave this thing on 24x7
I have no problems imagining a desktop running 24x7, but I have a feeling that laptops are not designed to handle that kind of duty cycle -- especially the hard disk drives. Otherwise, I'd think there'd be lots more reports of people using laptops as a NAT box / firewall.
Granted, that's based on anecdotal evidence and hearsay... is there anyone out there who has actually TRIED running a laptop 24x7? How did it work? Any problems to be aware of? (Oh, and what vendor and model was it?)
Separately, I worked at a company which made extensive use of PC-104 components which are designed to be small and low-powered. That was a few years ago, but a quick search on google should turn up numerous resources.
I was visiting some friends at your campus just this past December; sorry to hear about your loss.
Sadly, I can't give you any suggestions on how to better recover from your current situation -- seems like what can be done now is being done. It seems there's not been much of a response to this as yet, so I'll go out on a limb and offer some ideas that may sound obvious, but forest and trees and all that.
I'm reading between the lines, but I suspect that prior thoughts of backups and disaster recovery were shot down by the PHBs as being too expensive or time consuming. Here's your chance!
You now have a rare opportunity where proposals for FUTURE disaster recovery would actually be listened to!
First off, document what you are doing now! Write it down in a notebook, carry around a pocket tape recorder, use a PDA, hire some students who will answer a phone so that when something comes to mind, you can just dial a phone and get it recorded; whatever, but document what it is actually costing to recover! And not just the hardware/software expenses either! Increased calls to the help desk. Impact on faculty and students' schedules. Reconstructing the network topology.
Anything you can think of, now, document it! If, upon later review, some things are questionable, you can omit it then. But, if during that later review the thought was: "Gee this took more than we had thought it would, too bad we didn't keep track..." Get the picture?
So, now you'll have some kind of baseline as to what the actual recovery costs were, in this case. With that, you can now make a strong business case to implement a solid disaster recovery plan. Include server configs, backups, inventory of hardware and software... in short you've got a list of what you actually had to do to recover from this disaster; use that to identify what you'd need to do again.
Other ideas off the top of my head: Get a fire supression system. Split some of the equipment (e.g. labs) across multiple buildings so that if one burns down, there's some infrastructure that is still usable. You'll have a working system that you can refer to while rebuilding the destroyed system, too.
"Those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it." Back in the late 80's it was all the rage by software manufacturers to copy protect their software. (I still have a copy of Lotus 123 from that era.) Various schemes were used:
Bad sector(s) on a floppy disk that needed to be present in the drive for the program to run. The disk could not be copied easily using conventional means, but soon people wrote programs to crack the protection.
Many customers ran into problems when trying to use a legitimately purchased copy as their system reacted differently than expected to the copy protection. The vendors would add increasingly more complicated schemes that never blocked the motivated copier, but DID interfere with legitimate users being able to use the software on certain systems.
Printer port dongle that needed to be present in the parallel port. This allowed unlimited copying of the software, but you couldn't run it unless the dongle was in place.
There was a time when I had a half dozen of these hanging off the back of my PC (imagine 12 inches of dongles sticking out the back; couldn't push the PC against the wall; major leverage against the connector on the PC, etc.) Besides, each dongle interefered somewhat with the timing of the signal going through it... we had a case where a printer attached to the end of the dongle-chain needed to be powered up for the system to boot.
Startup questions that required the user to look up a certain value in the documentation and key it in when prompted by the application.
The thinking was users could easily copy the software, but photocopying the documentation was a much more difficult task that most "pirates" would not go through the effort of doing. I have a game somewhere that came with a "code sheet" printed on red paper that claimed it could not be photocopied. Truly, it was difficult using the black-and-white copiers available at the time, but I persevered and got a usable, albeit poor contrast, copy. (I feared spilling a coffee on the original and becoming unable to play the game which I had legally purchased.)
In short, users began to revolt and companies eventually began to recognize they were selling fewer copies of their software as people migrated to using non-copyprotected applications.
Software vendors learned this lesson the hard way many years ago, yet we now have audio (CD) and video (DVD) treading down the same path. I'm waiting to see how long it takes for them to learn this lesson, too.
You might also want to test the voltage your power supply is putting out.
Couldn't agree more; and not only in a static situation, but especially when you are booting the system.
Here's a strange but true experience. I was working at a small company which was making custom PBXs. We had a few prototypes which were supposed to be identical. Most of them would boot up fine, but one exhibited strange behavior and would fail to boot cleanly. We saw many different modes of failure. We swapped out boards, power supply, etc. between the "good" and the "strange" PBX, but to no avail.
Finally, I noticed that the power strips for the "good systems" had a 16-gauge wire to plug into the wall; the "strange" one had 18-gauge (i.e. a smaller gauge wire). Swapped in a new power strip and it worked like a charm.
The voltage drop over the smaller wire was significant enough at boot time (when there was the greatest demand for power) to cause the system to fail!
If this were applied to books, and I could have superfluous adjectives removed, then maybe I would only need a couple hours to read a Robert Jordan novel!;^)
But seriously, I had a class in college where the more book reports I wrote, the better my grade. I already had a "C" in the class, so I put it off until the end and had my final exams behind me. Then I grabbed the first book, and read the first sentence of the first paragraph on the right-hand page. Remember that a good writer introduces a paragraph with a "Topic Sentence". This was just taking advantage of that. There were a few parts which caught my interest as I was flipping through, and I read the surrounding pages in depth. Voila! I had the context of the entire book, and details on several specifics. Another hour later and I had written my first report. By the time the night was through, I'd brought my grade from a "C" to an "A"!
The flip side of this high-content bandwidth is sensory overload. I'm already running into this with the increasing onslaught of advertisements. I recall a time when the only ads were in newspapers, on the radio or TV, or on billboards. Maybe that's why I so enjoy taking a walk in the woods or relaxing on a beach away from all the noise and confusion.
There's much more to this than first meets the eye. Here are some things to consider when making the counts:
Press a key and hold it down - autorepeat. One keypress generates numerous characters of input.
Capitalization - Does "A" count the same as "a"? The "A" requires pressing TWO keys: the SHIFT key as well as the key for the letter a. (Assuming, of course, that the CAPS LOCK key is inactive! Otherwise, the "a" now requires the SHIFT key!)
Other "Meta" keys - What about the CTRL key? ALT key? Windows Key?
Non-US keyboards - It should not make a difference if a user's keyboard is designed for a different language; does it? (Think of German, Greek, Arabic, Korean, Japanese)
That's right, can't count just bytes, either! DBCS (Double-Byte Character Sets)
Then also consider non-character-generating, but frequently used keys like the arrow keys and the page-up, home, end etc. keys.
I'm sure there's more, but I would really be interested to see how well the program captures every single keypress!
BTW, it would be really interesting to compare the distribution of keypresses required for an experienced Emacs user compared to an experienced vi user for typing in say, identical computer programs! One could then see which one was more efficient. Then, of course, one could argue that some keypresses require more "work" than others. A home-row "d" being less work than pressing the digit "1"; but of course is that a "1" from the main group of keys, or the "1" on a numeric keypad? Let the editor wars continue!;^)
I sure hope we've learned from the incompatible mobile phone protocols that have developed over the years (GSM, CDMA, etc.). Unfortunately, I'm not optimistic given what I've read so far.
Though UWB sends its signal over "all frequencies", it depends on sending out the information at "certain times" (like an extremely fast clock, as best as I understand). It seems to me that if the USA comes up with a standard to clock that at one rate, and other countries at other rates, we'll end up with the same mess we have with current mobile phones.
Or are we likely, because the FCC is considering approving it as an unregulated use of the spectrum, to end up with each mobile phone manufacturing company coming up with its own variation and we'll end up with yet another variant on the old beta vs VHS battles?
What are the chances we can finally get a single world-wide standard that would allow a single mobile phone to work anyplace in the world?
Is google blocked/censored down under? If not, then a good chunk of the blocked content should still be readily available.
Instead of using, say:
http://www.foo.com
prefix it with a string to access google's cache:
http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:www.foo.com
I'll be the first to admit it is far from perfect (robots.txt, not up-to-the-second, lose access to on-line interactive sites (e.g. e-bay, etc.)), nor is it easy for the casual user. Still, an enterprising user could readily get past some of the censoring. Further, a simple ssh to a host in a different, non-blocked host in a different country would afford access as well.
As for determining WHAT has been blocked, I would think a simple pair of scans across all IP addresses, once attempting access in Australia, and another from, say, USA; then just compare notes and voila! That would seem to be a heck of lot quicker than the months they've been at it trying to go through formal channels.
So, Microsoft starts off with an OS, and then moves on to development tools/languages, application suites (office), a browser, and then internet-enabling apps.
AOL started off as a browser, moved into other internet-enabled apps (Netscape, ICQ, etc.), and now Linux (an OS).
As these behemoths try to grow ever larger, their markets will overlap more and more. What's next for AOL? My guess: a move into the application suites market.
Well, that, and now they'll be sending out lots of free Linux CDs in the mail! Seriously! That would put a real thorn in Microsoft's side, and they'll get their revenue by selling access to the on-line updates. They've already shown they can make money giving away trial AOL CDs; the additional cost of shipping RedHat CDs is relatively small.
Because flash cards and other competing storage media this small havent reached the 1GB plateau (yet...)
I stumbled upon an article yesterday which announced a 1GB Flash Memory CF card, but can't find it now. But, a quick
search on google offered me SanDisk announce 1 GB CF Type I that was dated November 5, 2001 and predicted retail availability in Q1 2002 at under $800. Granted, that's a higher price than the IBM MicroDrive, but it also has a much lower power consumption, so battery life would be greatly improved. In addition, the SanDisk offering has no moving parts, so it also has greater shock resistance.
I've not seen this mentioned here yet, but from my reading of the article they are intending to use this on televisions, too.
Yes, I can see the benefits of a shorter tube on a computer monitor (I'm using a 21" monitor right now that is nearly 20 inches deep and weighs nearly 65 pounds). The shorter tube would require less (heavy) glass and less plastic framing. So, smaller and lighter would be good. Also, instant on without requiring a warming circuit is a great plus, too.
BUT, these same benefits ALSO APPLY to conventional TVs, too! My current 27 inch TV sticks well out from my wall unit and weighs so much and is so bulky, I'm not ever going to try and move it again without help. It would be nice to be able to get a larger TV that would fit into the same space, weigh less, and would also not consume power just to keep the electron gun warm for "instant-on".
Other applications: shorter CRT tubes would be an advantage in any technical instruments that have a built-in display. Think: oscilliscope, medical instruments (pulse, BP, oxygen, etc. monitors), in-dash car displays, airplane cockpit displays, etc.
Now, to drool a bit for a more personal application... combine Cold CRT Gun with HDTV!
Assuming that this is in reference to the article, I really doubt that you would want a magnet cooling your computer unless there were some rather radical changes in CPU design that would makt it not involve electricity or NMR quantum computing.
Good point, but nothing says the "magnetic fridge" needs to be located within the PC's case. Insulated tubing could run from the external fridge into a heat exchanger within the case and back to the magnetic fridge (MF). Maybe not so convenient for a single PC. I saw no mention in the article as to efficiency compared to conventional cooling technology, but if this should prove to be more efficient, such a unit could become a standard component within a rack (e.g. in a hosting facility).
A very readable article, but I was surprised to see no other information on the referenced large telescopes. To save others from searching as I did, take a look at:
Slashdot Mirror
This is very similar to the problems I had back when everything was based on a mainframe and terminals. What do you do when THE computer is down? Here's some ideas that worked, then, and some others that I've found helpful, now.
So far as I know, Murphy's Law has not yet been repealed. Expect things to go wrong. Come up with contingencies. Do what you can. (And if you can't do anything, take a vacation and make the most of it!)
If you are not already telecommuting, and are thinking of starting, be sure to discuss these issues with your employer BEFORE YOU START!
I was fortunate enough to learn a second human language (German) in high school AFTER I had learned a couple computer languages. I had already gained experience in learning different grammars and vocabularies in simple (computer) languages before delving into another human language.
My German teacher stressed often that we were NOT to translate the German into English (my first language) to understand it. Let the mind THINK in German. I am so grateful for that exhortation!
Since then, I've programmed in about 20 other languages and spent two years testing a compiler, too. I often found myself thinking about how I thought in those different languages. Though I can't begin to explain the details to anyone, I came to an awareness that I had developed a meta-language of abstractions of concepts. (Analagous to the idea that all squares are rectangles, but not all rectangles are squares.)
While I was testing that compiler, I happened upon something that utterly fascinated me: translations of gibberish in English into other languages! That is, "Jabberwocky" by Lewis Carroll (Charles Lutwidge Dodgson). There is no possible literal translation, and yet when I read the German translation of it, I was amazed at how it had captured the "sense" of the poem -- rhyme, meter, even imagery! None other that Douglas R. Hofstadter wrote a lucid and illuminating piece on Translations of Jabberwocky -- it's a MUST READ!
For more fun, check out Jabberwocky Variations which contains links to translations in 29 different languages and 23 Parodies, too!
Automatically applying patches is NOT a solution! There are countless stories where the applying of patches caused formerly working software to crash.(*)
One major advantage of OSS vs Commercial software is the availability of the source code. Another major benefit, but less well recognized, is the visibility of REPORTED DEFECTS. Prior to obtaining an OSS application, say on sourceforge, I can peruse the bug list and get a complete list of reported bugs. What's the chances I can see the complete list of reported defects in, say, Microsoft Office?
Okay, why not just have a law passed that requires commercial software developers to make all reported bugs publically visible? Ain't gonna happen; political contributions and lobbying efforts would squash that in a heartbeat.
BUT, there's another approach. Don't use LEGAL requirements -- make it a MARKET requirement.
In other words, consider these two scenarios when making a recommendation for two different software packages:
In short, software will always have bugs -- just as OSS makes the code available, we can use market forces to trumpet the same visibility of the known (and future) bugs.
(*) Footnote: Feature vs Bug... many years ago I worked for 2+ years in testing a COBOL compiler that was being upgraded to support the latest standard. The version that was already out in the field was rife with bugs. Several customers were worried that we were going to fix some bugs they depended on! Though non-standard code, they had developed workarounds and used them extensively -- fixing the bugs in the compiler would break their programs!
There's a big difference between stating conclusions and stating observations.
Consider the difference between these two examples:
Example 1: "Joe Developer is a tremendous asset who has a great mastery of technology and is sure to be a powerful resource wherever he works."
Example 2: "I worked with Joe Developer on a technically challenging project with intense time pressures to get the product to market. On a number of occasions, I saw him not only detect omissions in the specifications, but he also worked with management and sales to obtain clarification. There were several times when we worked late into the night to help get a product release completed on time. I enjoyed working with him as I found his work ethic and sense of humor were real assets on this project.; I would like to work with him again in the future. "
In the second example, I'm sharing my observations based on my OWN experiences -- I'm making NO statements as to his suitability on a different project or at a later date. In other words "This has been my experience." Leave it to the potential new employer to draw his OWN conclusions.
BTW, I've found this works well in many other areas besides just references. At least, that's been MY experience! ;^)
Need some more details to really answer your query.
I've had some success with myhosting.com which offers a simple $9.95/month package with unlimited bandwidth and 50 MB of storage. But, it's a windows-based platform and I'm looking for a Linux web hosting solution onto which I can move my site. I've done some googling, but can't tell much about the quality of the providers I've found. Besides, I've got this nagging thought that I'd pick some company, get the site set up, and have them go bamkrupt on me. :(
Can anyone recommend an impartial web site that rates and/or compares the various web hosting providers?
I can see applications for this beyond just the mass market. My first thought would be for carrying additioanl voice circuits over a T1 line. (Say, for carryting voice traffic between two locations in a large company.)
A T1 line suports 24 circuits, each of which has IIRC 64Kbps (ignoring RBS, etc.) Whatever. Each of these circuits can support one conversation. Using this technology, several more conversations could be carried on one circuit. (Their web site states 8Kbits for high-quality voice; 4Kbits for intelligible voice.) Even using the 8Kbit rate, that means 8 conversations could be carried on one voice circuit.
The result? A single T1 could carry 192 conversations instead of just 24. Or, put another way, get 8 T1's of voice capacity for the price of just one T1. At anywhere from $600-$1000 per T1, that adds up really fast.
Now, how long would it be until the phone company decides to replace POTS circuits with one of these? Dial-up users would find their modems capped at 8Kbits? Blech!
Question: If this idea is viable, why don't ISPs implement it, too? For example, if AOL used this technique on a few of its dial-up (or cable) IP addresses, they could potentially make quite an impact. Futher, they could apply this technique across each of their address blocks. They could also rotate through the address block the particular addresses which act as the honeypot.
Now imagine that AT&T, Earthlink, MSN, and other ISPs implemented this, too, that should put a HUGE DENT in spamming.
Granted, this would chew up bandwidth on their network, but delivering spam chews it up, too.
Please, if there are mistakes in this, don't mod me down but instead point out what ISPs COULD DO to make this work. Thanks!
That's right, they don't set a root password, and seem to expect users will be running as root right from the start. That's surely not the best way to introduce a newbie into best practices.
Two words: CODE RED!
Let the students burn the CDs themselves. Just set up a server (ala napster), tell the students to download the lectures. Then, if the students actually want to burn them to CD, they're free to do so (set upa FAQ, if need be).
First off here's a simplification that anyone can try. In my high school physics class (many years ago ;-) when we were studying waves, one of our lab experiments was to go out into the tiled-floor hallway. With the help of a lab partner, we'd stretch out a slinky along the floor. We experimented with creating standing waves of different periods. This permitted experiments in the horizontal and longitudinal axes (though not in the vertical, which the sliiiiiinky also supports). So, try it at home!
Secondly, I have a suggestion concerning the tendency of the sliiiiiiiiiiinky to get tangled onto itself that was often mentioned in the article. Wouldn't an initial tensioning of the sliiiiiiinky reduce or event prevent that from happening? I'm thinking the use of some cords, strings, or bungie cords being attached to the ends of the sliiiinky and whose other ends would be attached to the endmost vertical support poles. The downside, I would expect, is that the wave would move more quickly down the length of the sliiiiinky.
I had the same thought about using a laptop, but in the original posting, there is also this:
I have no problems imagining a desktop running 24x7, but I have a feeling that laptops are not designed to handle that kind of duty cycle -- especially the hard disk drives. Otherwise, I'd think there'd be lots more reports of people using laptops as a NAT box / firewall.
Granted, that's based on anecdotal evidence and hearsay... is there anyone out there who has actually TRIED running a laptop 24x7? How did it work? Any problems to be aware of? (Oh, and what vendor and model was it?)
Separately, I worked at a company which made extensive use of PC-104 components which are designed to be small and low-powered. That was a few years ago, but a quick search on google should turn up numerous resources.
Good Luck!
I was visiting some friends at your campus just this past December; sorry to hear about your loss.
Sadly, I can't give you any suggestions on how to better recover from your current situation -- seems like what can be done now is being done. It seems there's not been much of a response to this as yet, so I'll go out on a limb and offer some ideas that may sound obvious, but forest and trees and all that.
I'm reading between the lines, but I suspect that prior thoughts of backups and disaster recovery were shot down by the PHBs as being too expensive or time consuming. Here's your chance!
You now have a rare opportunity where proposals for FUTURE disaster recovery would actually be listened to!
First off, document what you are doing now! Write it down in a notebook, carry around a pocket tape recorder, use a PDA, hire some students who will answer a phone so that when something comes to mind, you can just dial a phone and get it recorded; whatever, but document what it is actually costing to recover! And not just the hardware/software expenses either! Increased calls to the help desk. Impact on faculty and students' schedules. Reconstructing the network topology.
Anything you can think of, now, document it! If, upon later review, some things are questionable, you can omit it then. But, if during that later review the thought was: "Gee this took more than we had thought it would, too bad we didn't keep track..." Get the picture?
So, now you'll have some kind of baseline as to what the actual recovery costs were, in this case. With that, you can now make a strong business case to implement a solid disaster recovery plan. Include server configs, backups, inventory of hardware and software... in short you've got a list of what you actually had to do to recover from this disaster; use that to identify what you'd need to do again.
Other ideas off the top of my head: Get a fire supression system. Split some of the equipment (e.g. labs) across multiple buildings so that if one burns down, there's some infrastructure that is still usable. You'll have a working system that you can refer to while rebuilding the destroyed system, too.
"Those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it." Back in the late 80's it was all the rage by software manufacturers to copy protect their software. (I still have a copy of Lotus 123 from that era.) Various schemes were used:
Many customers ran into problems when trying to use a legitimately purchased copy as their system reacted differently than expected to the copy protection. The vendors would add increasingly more complicated schemes that never blocked the motivated copier, but DID interfere with legitimate users being able to use the software on certain systems.
There was a time when I had a half dozen of these hanging off the back of my PC (imagine 12 inches of dongles sticking out the back; couldn't push the PC against the wall; major leverage against the connector on the PC, etc.) Besides, each dongle interefered somewhat with the timing of the signal going through it... we had a case where a printer attached to the end of the dongle-chain needed to be powered up for the system to boot.
The thinking was users could easily copy the software, but photocopying the documentation was a much more difficult task that most "pirates" would not go through the effort of doing. I have a game somewhere that came with a "code sheet" printed on red paper that claimed it could not be photocopied. Truly, it was difficult using the black-and-white copiers available at the time, but I persevered and got a usable, albeit poor contrast, copy. (I feared spilling a coffee on the original and becoming unable to play the game which I had legally purchased.)
In short, users began to revolt and companies eventually began to recognize they were selling fewer copies of their software as people migrated to using non-copyprotected applications.
Software vendors learned this lesson the hard way many years ago, yet we now have audio (CD) and video (DVD) treading down the same path. I'm waiting to see how long it takes for them to learn this lesson, too.
Feds Undertaking Massive Passenger Profiling Plan
<humor>
This doesn't sound too hard. I mean, just how much variety are you gonna see looking at the profiles (side view) of massive passengers? ;^)
</humor>
You might also want to test the voltage your power supply is putting out.
Couldn't agree more; and not only in a static situation, but especially when you are booting the system.
Here's a strange but true experience. I was working at a small company which was making custom PBXs. We had a few prototypes which were supposed to be identical. Most of them would boot up fine, but one exhibited strange behavior and would fail to boot cleanly. We saw many different modes of failure. We swapped out boards, power supply, etc. between the "good" and the "strange" PBX, but to no avail.
Finally, I noticed that the power strips for the "good systems" had a 16-gauge wire to plug into the wall; the "strange" one had 18-gauge (i.e. a smaller gauge wire). Swapped in a new power strip and it worked like a charm.
The voltage drop over the smaller wire was significant enough at boot time (when there was the greatest demand for power) to cause the system to fail!
If this were applied to books, and I could have superfluous adjectives removed, then maybe I would only need a couple hours to read a Robert Jordan novel! ;^)
But seriously, I had a class in college where the more book reports I wrote, the better my grade. I already had a "C" in the class, so I put it off until the end and had my final exams behind me. Then I grabbed the first book, and read the first sentence of the first paragraph on the right-hand page. Remember that a good writer introduces a paragraph with a "Topic Sentence". This was just taking advantage of that. There were a few parts which caught my interest as I was flipping through, and I read the surrounding pages in depth. Voila! I had the context of the entire book, and details on several specifics. Another hour later and I had written my first report. By the time the night was through, I'd brought my grade from a "C" to an "A"!
The flip side of this high-content bandwidth is sensory overload. I'm already running into this with the increasing onslaught of advertisements. I recall a time when the only ads were in newspapers, on the radio or TV, or on billboards. Maybe that's why I so enjoy taking a walk in the woods or relaxing on a beach away from all the noise and confusion.
There's much more to this than first meets the eye. Here are some things to consider when making the counts:
I'm sure there's more, but I would really be interested to see how well the program captures every single keypress!
BTW, it would be really interesting to compare the distribution of keypresses required for an experienced Emacs user compared to an experienced vi user for typing in say, identical computer programs! One could then see which one was more efficient. Then, of course, one could argue that some keypresses require more "work" than others. A home-row "d" being less work than pressing the digit "1"; but of course is that a "1" from the main group of keys, or the "1" on a numeric keypad? Let the editor wars continue! ;^)
I sure hope we've learned from the incompatible mobile phone protocols that have developed over the years (GSM, CDMA, etc.). Unfortunately, I'm not optimistic given what I've read so far.
Though UWB sends its signal over "all frequencies", it depends on sending out the information at "certain times" (like an extremely fast clock, as best as I understand). It seems to me that if the USA comes up with a standard to clock that at one rate, and other countries at other rates, we'll end up with the same mess we have with current mobile phones.
Or are we likely, because the FCC is considering approving it as an unregulated use of the spectrum, to end up with each mobile phone manufacturing company coming up with its own variation and we'll end up with yet another variant on the old beta vs VHS battles?
What are the chances we can finally get a single world-wide standard that would allow a single mobile phone to work anyplace in the world?
Is google blocked/censored down under? If not, then a good chunk of the blocked content should still be readily available.
Instead of using, say:
http://www.foo.com
prefix it with a string to access google's cache:
http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:www.foo.com
I'll be the first to admit it is far from perfect (robots.txt, not up-to-the-second, lose access to on-line interactive sites (e.g. e-bay, etc.)), nor is it easy for the casual user. Still, an enterprising user could readily get past some of the censoring. Further, a simple ssh to a host in a different, non-blocked host in a different country would afford access as well.
As for determining WHAT has been blocked, I would think a simple pair of scans across all IP addresses, once attempting access in Australia, and another from, say, USA; then just compare notes and voila! That would seem to be a heck of lot quicker than the months they've been at it trying to go through formal channels.
So, Microsoft starts off with an OS, and then moves on to development tools/languages, application suites (office), a browser, and then internet-enabling apps.
AOL started off as a browser, moved into other internet-enabled apps (Netscape, ICQ, etc.), and now Linux (an OS).
As these behemoths try to grow ever larger, their markets will overlap more and more. What's next for AOL? My guess: a move into the application suites market.
Well, that, and now they'll be sending out lots of free Linux CDs in the mail! Seriously! That would put a real thorn in Microsoft's side, and they'll get their revenue by selling access to the on-line updates. They've already shown they can make money giving away trial AOL CDs; the additional cost of shipping RedHat CDs is relatively small.
What's Holding Up Broadband in the U.S.?
In my neighborhood, the cable and DSL broadband connections are held up by utility poles. :-)
Because flash cards and other competing storage media this small havent reached the 1GB plateau (yet...)
I stumbled upon an article yesterday which announced a 1GB Flash Memory CF card, but can't find it now. But, a quick
search on google offered me SanDisk announce 1 GB CF Type I that was dated November 5, 2001 and predicted retail availability in Q1 2002 at under $800. Granted, that's a higher price than the IBM MicroDrive, but it also has a much lower power consumption, so battery life would be greatly improved. In addition, the SanDisk offering has no moving parts, so it also has greater shock resistance.
I've not seen this mentioned here yet, but from my reading of the article they are intending to use this on televisions, too.
Yes, I can see the benefits of a shorter tube on a computer monitor (I'm using a 21" monitor right now that is nearly 20 inches deep and weighs nearly 65 pounds). The shorter tube would require less (heavy) glass and less plastic framing. So, smaller and lighter would be good. Also, instant on without requiring a warming circuit is a great plus, too.
BUT, these same benefits ALSO APPLY to conventional TVs, too! My current 27 inch TV sticks well out from my wall unit and weighs so much and is so bulky, I'm not ever going to try and move it again without help. It would be nice to be able to get a larger TV that would fit into the same space, weigh less, and would also not consume power just to keep the electron gun warm for "instant-on".
Other applications: shorter CRT tubes would be an advantage in any technical instruments that have a built-in display. Think: oscilliscope, medical instruments (pulse, BP, oxygen, etc. monitors), in-dash car displays, airplane cockpit displays, etc.
Now, to drool a bit for a more personal application... combine Cold CRT Gun with HDTV!
Assuming that this is in reference to the article, I really doubt that you would want a magnet cooling your computer unless there were some rather radical changes in CPU design that would makt it not involve electricity or NMR quantum computing.
Good point, but nothing says the "magnetic fridge" needs to be located within the PC's case. Insulated tubing could run from the external fridge into a heat exchanger within the case and back to the magnetic fridge (MF). Maybe not so convenient for a single PC. I saw no mention in the article as to efficiency compared to conventional cooling technology, but if this should prove to be more efficient, such a unit could become a standard component within a rack (e.g. in a hosting facility).
A very readable article, but I was surprised to see no other information on the referenced large telescopes. To save others from searching as I did, take a look at: