This is not a tech person. He seems to not understand the concept of "connection" versus "vulnerability".
Many of us have been part of this business modernization he speaks of, where companies are now connected to the Internet. True, many of them open themselves to attack via poor designs, neglectful oversight, or concessions of time and money. But simply connecting to the Internet doesn't mean you're on the hit list of a terrorist organization.
Tenet seems to be requesting that tool builders start consolidating authentication methods (albeit through very vague terms). This means a central authority to each permission on what is designed as an open network. Pshaw!
George, there are plenty of "non-open" networks (physical or virtual). Start inviting business to participate on those. Coerce advertisers, users, gamers, and businesses to use it, all authenticated through the CIA. See what you end up with. Crickets!
You see, the market exists exactly because it is open. If you try to close it, you invite it to rise elsewhere.
Let's use a metaphor, because I'm sure he deals in those most easily, being a few atmospheres above the ground level of reality here:
When a few houses are lined up next to one another, you have neighbors. At some point, there's so many people that social relationships cannot alone secure your home. So, you lock your door. Now there's many different types of locks, and they can be picked, or houses can be broken into. But what's inside? People usually don't horde gold under the floorboards anymore, so the risk/reward isn't really worth it. But to use the street and go from house to house is still free and open to everyone, without a "hall pass".
We are slowly getting there. Spammers, hackers, etc are getting higher penalties, and companies are learning to not store sensitive data near the internet. Consumers are getting way of credit card fraud and identity theft (much further behind in progress though). Simply put, the answer is developing organically, just like the net itself.
Re:Graphics Are Already Here...
on
Far Cry Tech Demo
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Half-Life 2 looks nice, but it would look twice as nice if they didn't have to worry about supporting people that don't have 256 megabyte graphics cards. Of course, nobody will ever make games like that...
So are you saying HL2 takes cheap systems into account, or doesn't? You make no sense. Games will always have to span a band of qualities.
Frankly this demo is tailored to distinct hardware. Just like Intel's specialized thread model or MS's DirectX API, you pick your market. If FarCry only runs this well on ATI 800X then they're actually selling 2 things: the card and the game.
I wouldn't be surprised if the 800X card series eventually started shipping with this game. Start the Hype Machine now.
Market history proves, though, that these endeavors may push the competition to support new concepts (designed in this case by ATI) and is a Good Thing, but one cannot raise the bar indefinitely. Eventually, they catch up. OpenGL 2.0 comes along, AMD creates spiffy chips, etc.
Then the premium you paid for such name-brand performance starts to look artificial. May I introduce my first piece of evidence: The Intel Pentium 4
Actually, I took the article as a huge set of techniques to isolate and figure out a discovered threat. If there was a virus on their machine that hadn't been caught by current AVS, with a different set of initial steps, one could do this same thing and built a bit signature.
I look forward to when the authors examine encrypted and polymorphic malware.
well, actually, the post's argument was that Republicans' government outpaces Democrats, but AFAICare, they both pork everything up.
What amazes me is that the "down home" americans, the 50% or so that make up the "working class" rural vote, believe that they somehow benefit from backing the party that spends in deficit and supports smaller government oversight in business alone, since in personal matters, we have abortion fights, patriots acts, and DCMA/internet nonsense.
These people end up the victims of closed factories, large corporate farming buyouts, and other corporate stomping, all while voting for people what have a "homeboy" appeal to their local nature. Sure, the local congressperson or senator may have a nice chuckle and win a government contract to build an extra submarine for 10$billion, but are these folks actually creating a sustainable lifestyle? nope. contracts end, environmental abuses catch up with you, and large corporations migrate to where the best manufacturering is. ask anyone in so many has-been towns - long after the politicos are done stumping, their constituents are screwed.
Having made homemade theatrcal film once, and then looking back at it to yearn for more resources to improve it, I liken it to refactoring code. There's just so many great things Lucas can do that other directors don't, I think it's a generous and thoughtful concept to spent time on this, rather than write and churn out another film altogether.
I think THX-1138 may just get another 2nd-run theater release around here (Portland, OR, USA) for this. I hope Star Wars III to V are next. I don't buy the DVDs - nor own any VHS tapes - but every 5 years or so, I'll watch it again and if it's been improved/changed - I'm game. I think Lucas is betting "so is the rest of the market".
Cory points out some compelling examples of past clashes between Content, Medium and Market. However, you must realize that there are difference between each historical phase.
In this one, I see certain new unique attributes:
- The record seller of today suffers from tunnel-vision. In a true global market, the knowledge of the cryto method and content location; everything except the key is everywhere. The collaborative nature of the global market tremendously speeds up the exposing of schemes and solutions to DRM.
- Once Content is unlocked, it is permanently unlocked. DeCSS forever opened the DVD format that was sold up to that point. Using the physical market, Content providers are reluctant to buy DRM since then it must guarantee it never fails. Given the huge Market, tech companies want to bring Content into the machines but cannot make that guarantee. So, a stalemate arises.
- Cory's argument that by building a non-DRM enhanced player, rish with copying and encoding capabilities would make a significant change, is lost in the oceans of US copyright and patent law, regardless of how popular it would be. Funny enough *right here* is where the FOSS saves us: By never charging for the technology - and never forming a single head to the beast - products are going to (or already) exist to be this fabled wonder-machine. Litigation can kill a project or company, but it cannot erase code from the mindshare.
It's worth exactly $0 because you don't own it. You are essentially renting the content on a single machine for a specified time: until that machine is obselete.
I've read all the 4/5 posts so far, and I haven't seen anyone comment directly about this, but I've seen it stated emotionally:
Under MS, people have a loss of controlling free and independent programs that they've chosen, written or can wrap their minds around. The NT kernel is documented (not freely), but the services, runtime dependencies and so on, are still a mystery to people. Most of them cannot be replaced with a better version you or some other smart programmer changed and released.
Under Linux, due somewhat to the novel time we're living in, there is a wealth of question/answer documentation about many daemons, programs aor options. Config files can be hacked and rehacked. This doesn't mean there's less complexity, but I think the complexity is more componentized under Linux. Linux may be a monolithic Kernel, but if you look through the history of MS's OS progression, you'll find many many things going into the "OS" that simply don't need to be there (culminating, famously, with a simple web browser being "an integral part of the operating system").
Today, MS strives to have one of the most "approachable" OS's on the market. They provide a platform for market dynamics with their OS. This is to allow endless vendors to install and provide additional services - some before you know it. They suffer, however, from a chosen userbase that then doesn't know what is on their box or how to manipulate it. So one of the myraid of issues is the "install", "play nice with..", "uninstall cleanly" cycle that MS leaves up to the user and vendor. Some past endeavors (think "plug and play database") have tried to cure this, but wrapping your arms across an entire living market is a moving target.
Linux, coming from a technical birth, strives to be approachable, but in the end it caters to the tinkerer in each of us. Even finding the "ps" command in a manual can be a world of discovery for the newbie tinkerer. Even without knowing how the guts work, one can ps for processes and look them up by name. In this way, it harkens back to "computer as tool" instead of "computer as appliance".
MS wants to sell you an appliance that has the largest set of behaviors to provide this market: Vendors selling goods / users consuming services / playing games / advertising channels sold to the market / digital rights management to allow any set a procedures to deliver content. MS wants to build the market and decide how users/businesses participate in it.
Linux provides none of this. It relies on its users to participate in the market by writing free tools, but not really define such a market. PGP didn't make a revolution, nor PNG images, nor any pretty desktop display. However, they are all great tools to allow people to get stuff done - without succumbing to a vendor-decided ruleset. The Linux movement strives to allow people or businesses to participate in the market without any vendor acting on their behalf.
I don't take this as completely crazy. Patches for bugs - and this one is somewhat obscure in the testing - happen all the time. Too bad for consoles, but I disagree with the concept of them anyway.
It does let me in on a bit of how testing occurred. When we deploy a system, there is a "dashboard" (ug, i hate the term) of all the settings in the program visible on another screen. As you walk through the application, you can check the values live. If thief had a mode to display this (and most FPS have a console that should deliver this), they'd be able to check AI settings. Perhaps they did and it still isn't working correctly - now thats a bug.
I have no good answer for you. I don't take it personally on me. You are arguing, essentially, with your own lifestyle of affording the transportation - if you really have a problem with it.
I'm guessing not, but at some price point for gas, you'll reevaluate all the travel. I wish you luck and lots of good books on tape.
I read that, and still thought "how far is too far?" I think this (tired) exercise of listing better ways to commute needs to always consider a bike. Especially when you can *put your bike* on most public transportation and shorten overall distances by marrying the two.
There's really no need to squabble over all this. As gas prices rise, the "what do we do now?" questions are going to come in a steady stream, from many media directions. For the most part, reducing your total living radius and then going human powered inside it is the best bet.
By the way, this includes where you get your food, clothing, and fun. I live in Portland, OR and for all the "hippie" comments I hear, I'm happy to eat food from the local gardens and bike around. Am I a Scraping-the-bottom loser student or such? Nope, I'm a 30-something businessman doing just fine. But for the most part, I don't need to drive.
Other responders to this point out the violence of conversion. That can be one measure, but not the only. Organized religions are adept at weathering adversity simply because they have a core doctrine that achieves two things:
Keep the core beliefs of the religion alive within the group, forming some tangible difference in behavior or emotion. Even if this is kept out of sight, a religion may go "underground" and still survive if the core group is strict to the doctrine
The "underground" group doesn't appear so different externally that the adverse conditions weed them out. This may require them to behavior in ways counter to their core doctrine simply to survive, and has been a subject of much debate.
Can someone please describe any adaptive algorithms that could be used. Specifically, I'm thinking of:
- dirty marking unreferenced pages when swaped. if these mem pages are not used after the swap out, no need to swap them in again. i'm prety sure this already occurs
- for process using high swap demands, increase their weighted priority for pages, with a window-averaged for swaps. so then, my database process could hog under load while my less-used apps may swap because they're used less often. could be taylored differently for code versus data segs.
- page-impage comparisons to avoid holding duplicate code segment pages in memory. this plays with the concept of shared libs a bit, but could avoid duplicate pages, especially if this information is saved in a precalc'd hash table that is stored.
Where are you applying? What are your limitations for relocation? What school gave you this degree? What specialization is your degree in? What job posting are you replying to? What does your resume look like? How are your interviewing skiils?
* NOTE : none of these have anything to do with "entry level programmer" generalizations. Methinks your issue is not the topic but the delivery.
Re:19% of commercial email? At least!
on
Spam Bits
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
If your customers are that valuable in their purchasing habits...why not simply direct them to a web site to pull the information? Then you can stop emailing people and they will read your web site if you are truely competative. For the most part, this avoid 19% loss -> 0% loss.
I think nobody should be using the email protocol for commercial purposes. It's just so much push technology that is waste and bog. "on demand" seems to be much more suitable for volume.
When people sign up "to get periodic updates about our products" they are opting-in for another type of spam, but it's still scatter that seems misguided to me. Why not just ask people to come back? You could email them the address and everything else once, but they usually already have that from a puchase receipt.
True enough. But the code will be in the courthouse, and available to SCO. SCO can move to introduce more evidence later. This is going to be a big mess in the end, unless someone gets cold feet.
Some interesting things in this order: SCO doesn't have to provide anything until IBM releases "about 245" products that make up the Dynix/AIX family to them. It also may have to provide the code to the OS's themselves. The judge state some prior cases as why SCO should be allowed to examine IBM's internal code.
SCO and IBM, under IBM list of orders, should come up with a list of the top 1000 relevant witnesses. Holy smokes.
This doesn't look like a SCO loss at all. It looks like a big court-ordered phase of "looking for more proof". Remember, this is the discovery phase, or so I've read.
I don't understand this at all. Our everyday experiences are simply products of the "real workings" of the universe. You may think Newtonian physics suffices for what you need, but your "little ones" wouldn't be able to dream of being an astronaut, science professor, astronomer, or a myriad of other things without these other new-fangled theories.
When we achieve enough proficiency in our understanding to make accurate predictions, and validate them with observations, then publish them, have them scrutinized publicly and repeated, we're making vast improvements to the knowledge humanity holds. The fact that we're in so esoteric topics for new things at the moment just goes to show how valid this system is; we've built a cohesive worldview in physics down to the quantum level. There, mysteries abound, but it doesn't mean we shouldn't be there.
Well, there's the old issue of reciprocity: if nobody knows the [jewels] have been taken from the (time-locked) safe, there's a fixed (and known) period of time for thieves to use the cover. this has been built into many a movie plot.
so then the issue isn't the lock itself, it's the people surround it during the open time period. once that is comprimised, the lock serves no purpose.
picking a lock is just one part of a problem : the other is securing the key. in a bar, one could theoretically press a key into a mold for later duplication (old trick and not very efficient).
however, with an optical key, one merely has to carry around a recepticle that, in turn, flashes a beam through the key's inputs, and record the appropriate output. nothing physical needs to be made. in today's terms, i call in the sequence to a buddy who then lays fiber into a template and uses it. meanwhile, i engage conversation on target, reporting when she's left.
cars? are you kidding? these are even easier, merely get a job as a valet and start your database. since it's all just digital information, you have access to VIN and lock solution, license plate number and home town/state (if not entire address, since most people's cars have it somewhere - like the insurance docs). these databases could be traded online just like anything else.
while i think this is very interesting, it still is no substitute for bio-based locks. however, they have their own problems (seem like every part of the body can be captured/duplicated).
First, I'm not surprised that they position themselves not against the tech, but against SUSE and RH as licensed support vendors. However, it seems to immediately miss the concept that a growing number of home users are exploring Linux as a cheaper alternative to an email/letter writing/game appliance.
As to those "edge servers" that Linux is capturing, he may want to look at where all the tech logic is flowing: "edge servers". If web services and other distributed apps continue to grow for enterprise solutions, Linux is going to house most of those according to his logic. Just by identifying it doesn't seem to answer the issue of "what is your strategy?".
The whole price point comment seems too fluffy. Of course you have to look at what you're doing! Haven't you made up *any* clear strategy yet? If he'd said "we're going to show that Windows can scale, can be as secure and reliable, and that the value-added product it competitave with the leading vendors" I'd appreciate the interview. But he didn't.
Not really. It accepted a collection of SQL and returned multiple resutls in one pass. Granted, without the background about our process structure - I would agree with you on the info you've read, but it was very cool indeed.
Slashdot Mirror
This is not a tech person. He seems to not understand the concept of "connection" versus "vulnerability".
Many of us have been part of this business modernization he speaks of, where companies are now connected to the Internet. True, many of them open themselves to attack via poor designs, neglectful oversight, or concessions of time and money. But simply connecting to the Internet doesn't mean you're on the hit list of a terrorist organization.
Tenet seems to be requesting that tool builders start consolidating authentication methods (albeit through very vague terms). This means a central authority to each permission on what is designed as an open network. Pshaw!
George, there are plenty of "non-open" networks (physical or virtual). Start inviting business to participate on those. Coerce advertisers, users, gamers, and businesses to use it, all authenticated through the CIA. See what you end up with. Crickets!
You see, the market exists exactly because it is open. If you try to close it, you invite it to rise elsewhere.
Let's use a metaphor, because I'm sure he deals in those most easily, being a few atmospheres above the ground level of reality here:
When a few houses are lined up next to one another, you have neighbors. At some point, there's so many people that social relationships cannot alone secure your home. So, you lock your door. Now there's many different types of locks, and they can be picked, or houses can be broken into. But what's inside? People usually don't horde gold under the floorboards anymore, so the risk/reward isn't really worth it. But to use the street and go from house to house is still free and open to everyone, without a "hall pass".
We are slowly getting there. Spammers, hackers, etc are getting higher penalties, and companies are learning to not store sensitive data near the internet. Consumers are getting way of credit card fraud and identity theft (much further behind in progress though). Simply put, the answer is developing organically, just like the net itself.
Half-Life 2 looks nice, but it would look twice as nice if they didn't have to worry about supporting people that don't have 256 megabyte graphics cards. Of course, nobody will ever make games like that ...
So are you saying HL2 takes cheap systems into account, or doesn't? You make no sense. Games will always have to span a band of qualities.
Frankly this demo is tailored to distinct hardware. Just like Intel's specialized thread model or MS's DirectX API, you pick your market. If FarCry only runs this well on ATI 800X then they're actually selling 2 things: the card and the game.
I wouldn't be surprised if the 800X card series eventually started shipping with this game. Start the Hype Machine now.
Market history proves, though, that these endeavors may push the competition to support new concepts (designed in this case by ATI) and is a Good Thing, but one cannot raise the bar indefinitely. Eventually, they catch up. OpenGL 2.0 comes along, AMD creates spiffy chips, etc.
Then the premium you paid for such name-brand performance starts to look artificial. May I introduce my first piece of evidence: The Intel Pentium 4
Actually, I took the article as a huge set of techniques to isolate and figure out a discovered threat. If there was a virus on their machine that hadn't been caught by current AVS, with a different set of initial steps, one could do this same thing and built a bit signature.
I look forward to when the authors examine encrypted and polymorphic malware.
well, actually, the post's argument was that Republicans' government outpaces Democrats, but AFAICare, they both pork everything up.
What amazes me is that the "down home" americans, the 50% or so that make up the "working class" rural vote, believe that they somehow benefit from backing the party that spends in deficit and supports smaller government oversight in business alone, since in personal matters, we have abortion fights, patriots acts, and DCMA/internet nonsense.
These people end up the victims of closed factories, large corporate farming buyouts, and other corporate stomping, all while voting for people what have a "homeboy" appeal to their local nature. Sure, the local congressperson or senator may have a nice chuckle and win a government contract to build an extra submarine for 10$billion, but are these folks actually creating a sustainable lifestyle? nope. contracts end, environmental abuses catch up with you, and large corporations migrate to where the best manufacturering is. ask anyone in so many has-been towns - long after the politicos are done stumping, their constituents are screwed.
Having made homemade theatrcal film once, and then looking back at it to yearn for more resources to improve it, I liken it to refactoring code. There's just so many great things Lucas can do that other directors don't, I think it's a generous and thoughtful concept to spent time on this, rather than write and churn out another film altogether.
I think THX-1138 may just get another 2nd-run theater release around here (Portland, OR, USA) for this. I hope Star Wars III to V are next. I don't buy the DVDs - nor own any VHS tapes - but every 5 years or so, I'll watch it again and if it's been improved/changed - I'm game. I think Lucas is betting "so is the rest of the market".
mug
Cory points out some compelling examples of past clashes between Content, Medium and Market. However, you must realize that there are difference between each historical phase.
In this one, I see certain new unique attributes:
- The record seller of today suffers from tunnel-vision. In a true global market, the knowledge of the cryto method and content location; everything except the key is everywhere. The collaborative nature of the global market tremendously speeds up the exposing of schemes and solutions to DRM.
- Once Content is unlocked, it is permanently unlocked. DeCSS forever opened the DVD format that was sold up to that point. Using the physical market, Content providers are reluctant to buy DRM since then it must guarantee it never fails. Given the huge Market, tech companies want to bring Content into the machines but cannot make that guarantee. So, a stalemate arises.
- Cory's argument that by building a non-DRM enhanced player, rish with copying and encoding capabilities would make a significant change, is lost in the oceans of US copyright and patent law, regardless of how popular it would be. Funny enough *right here* is where the FOSS saves us: By never charging for the technology - and never forming a single head to the beast - products are going to (or already) exist to be this fabled wonder-machine. Litigation can kill a project or company, but it cannot erase code from the mindshare.
It's worth exactly $0 because you don't own it. You are essentially renting the content on a single machine for a specified time: until that machine is obselete.
I've read all the 4/5 posts so far, and I haven't seen anyone comment directly about this, but I've seen it stated emotionally:
Under MS, people have a loss of controlling free and independent programs that they've chosen, written or can wrap their minds around. The NT kernel is documented (not freely), but the services, runtime dependencies and so on, are still a mystery to people. Most of them cannot be replaced with a better version you or some other smart programmer changed and released.
Under Linux, due somewhat to the novel time we're living in, there is a wealth of question/answer documentation about many daemons, programs aor options. Config files can be hacked and rehacked. This doesn't mean there's less complexity, but I think the complexity is more componentized under Linux. Linux may be a monolithic Kernel, but if you look through the history of MS's OS progression, you'll find many many things going into the "OS" that simply don't need to be there (culminating, famously, with a simple web browser being "an integral part of the operating system").
Today, MS strives to have one of the most "approachable" OS's on the market. They provide a platform for market dynamics with their OS. This is to allow endless vendors to install and provide additional services - some before you know it. They suffer, however, from a chosen userbase that then doesn't know what is on their box or how to manipulate it. So one of the myraid of issues is the "install", "play nice with..", "uninstall cleanly" cycle that MS leaves up to the user and vendor. Some past endeavors (think "plug and play database") have tried to cure this, but wrapping your arms across an entire living market is a moving target.
Linux, coming from a technical birth, strives to be approachable, but in the end it caters to the tinkerer in each of us. Even finding the "ps" command in a manual can be a world of discovery for the newbie tinkerer. Even without knowing how the guts work, one can ps for processes and look them up by name. In this way, it harkens back to "computer as tool" instead of "computer as appliance".
MS wants to sell you an appliance that has the largest set of behaviors to provide this market: Vendors selling goods / users consuming services / playing games / advertising channels sold to the market / digital rights management to allow any set a procedures to deliver content. MS wants to build the market and decide how users/businesses participate in it.
Linux provides none of this. It relies on its users to participate in the market by writing free tools, but not really define such a market. PGP didn't make a revolution, nor PNG images, nor any pretty desktop display. However, they are all great tools to allow people to get stuff done - without succumbing to a vendor-decided ruleset. The Linux movement strives to allow people or businesses to participate in the market without any vendor acting on their behalf.
I don't take this as completely crazy. Patches for bugs - and this one is somewhat obscure in the testing - happen all the time. Too bad for consoles, but I disagree with the concept of them anyway.
It does let me in on a bit of how testing occurred. When we deploy a system, there is a "dashboard" (ug, i hate the term) of all the settings in the program visible on another screen. As you walk through the application, you can check the values live. If thief had a mode to display this (and most FPS have a console that should deliver this), they'd be able to check AI settings. Perhaps they did and it still isn't working correctly - now thats a bug.
mug
I have no good answer for you. I don't take it personally on me. You are arguing, essentially, with your own lifestyle of affording the transportation - if you really have a problem with it.
I'm guessing not, but at some price point for gas, you'll reevaluate all the travel. I wish you luck and lots of good books on tape.
I read that, and still thought "how far is too far?" I think this (tired) exercise of listing better ways to commute needs to always consider a bike. Especially when you can *put your bike* on most public transportation and shorten overall distances by marrying the two.
There's really no need to squabble over all this. As gas prices rise, the "what do we do now?" questions are going to come in a steady stream, from many media directions. For the most part, reducing your total living radius and then going human powered inside it is the best bet.
By the way, this includes where you get your food, clothing, and fun. I live in Portland, OR and for all the "hippie" comments I hear, I'm happy to eat food from the local gardens and bike around. Am I a Scraping-the-bottom loser student or such? Nope, I'm a 30-something businessman doing just fine. But for the most part, I don't need to drive.
Hint: Neither do most people.
Keep the core beliefs of the religion alive within the group, forming some tangible difference in behavior or emotion. Even if this is kept out of sight, a religion may go "underground" and still survive if the core group is strict to the doctrine
The "underground" group doesn't appear so different externally that the adverse conditions weed them out. This may require them to behavior in ways counter to their core doctrine simply to survive, and has been a subject of much debate.
Can someone please describe any adaptive algorithms that could be used. Specifically, I'm thinking of:
- dirty marking unreferenced pages when swaped. if these mem pages are not used after the swap out, no need to swap them in again. i'm prety sure this already occurs
- for process using high swap demands, increase their weighted priority for pages, with a window-averaged for swaps. so then, my database process could hog under load while my less-used apps may swap because they're used less often. could be taylored differently for code versus data segs.
- page-impage comparisons to avoid holding duplicate code segment pages in memory. this plays with the concept of shared libs a bit, but could avoid duplicate pages, especially if this information is saved in a precalc'd hash table that is stored.
just ideas.
Where are you applying?
What are your limitations for relocation?
What school gave you this degree?
What specialization is your degree in?
What job posting are you replying to?
What does your resume look like?
How are your interviewing skiils?
* NOTE : none of these have anything to do with "entry level programmer" generalizations. Methinks your issue is not the topic but the delivery.
If your customers are that valuable in their purchasing habits...why not simply direct them to a web site to pull the information? Then you can stop emailing people and they will read your web site if you are truely competative. For the most part, this avoid 19% loss -> 0% loss.
I think nobody should be using the email protocol for commercial purposes. It's just so much push technology that is waste and bog. "on demand" seems to be much more suitable for volume.
When people sign up "to get periodic updates about our products" they are opting-in for another type of spam, but it's still scatter that seems misguided to me. Why not just ask people to come back? You could email them the address and everything else once, but they usually already have that from a puchase receipt.
peh
True enough. But the code will be in the courthouse, and available to SCO. SCO can move to introduce more evidence later. This is going to be a big mess in the end, unless someone gets cold feet.
Some interesting things in this order: SCO doesn't have to provide anything until IBM releases "about 245" products that make up the Dynix/AIX family to them. It also may have to provide the code to the OS's themselves. The judge state some prior cases as why SCO should be allowed to examine IBM's internal code.
SCO and IBM, under IBM list of orders, should come up with a list of the top 1000 relevant witnesses. Holy smokes.
This doesn't look like a SCO loss at all. It looks like a big court-ordered phase of "looking for more proof". Remember, this is the discovery phase, or so I've read.
I don't understand this at all. Our everyday experiences are simply products of the "real workings" of the universe. You may think Newtonian physics suffices for what you need, but your "little ones" wouldn't be able to dream of being an astronaut, science professor, astronomer, or a myriad of other things without these other new-fangled theories.
When we achieve enough proficiency in our understanding to make accurate predictions, and validate them with observations, then publish them, have them scrutinized publicly and repeated, we're making vast improvements to the knowledge humanity holds. The fact that we're in so esoteric topics for new things at the moment just goes to show how valid this system is; we've built a cohesive worldview in physics down to the quantum level. There, mysteries abound, but it doesn't mean we shouldn't be there.
Sounds like we're not going to have these locks around anyway, at those prices!
Well, there's the old issue of reciprocity: if nobody knows the [jewels] have been taken from the (time-locked) safe, there's a fixed (and known) period of time for thieves to use the cover. this has been built into many a movie plot.
so then the issue isn't the lock itself, it's the people surround it during the open time period. once that is comprimised, the lock serves no purpose.
picking a lock is just one part of a problem : the other is securing the key. in a bar, one could theoretically press a key into a mold for later duplication (old trick and not very efficient).
however, with an optical key, one merely has to carry around a recepticle that, in turn, flashes a beam through the key's inputs, and record the appropriate output. nothing physical needs to be made. in today's terms, i call in the sequence to a buddy who then lays fiber into a template and uses it. meanwhile, i engage conversation on target, reporting when she's left.
cars? are you kidding? these are even easier, merely get a job as a valet and start your database. since it's all just digital information, you have access to VIN and lock solution, license plate number and home town/state (if not entire address, since most people's cars have it somewhere - like the insurance docs). these databases could be traded online just like anything else.
while i think this is very interesting, it still is no substitute for bio-based locks. however, they have their own problems (seem like every part of the body can be captured/duplicated).
Seems like another record is broken with this site being /.'d within seconds.
But hold on...they're reviewing the tapes...
Well, reading the headline was fun.
Haha. Thanks for that. my posts are written in sporadic disjointed bursts that don't always make sense. maybe i have ADD.
mmm.. pretzels.
First, I'm not surprised that they position themselves not against the tech, but against SUSE and RH as licensed support vendors. However, it seems to immediately miss the concept that a growing number of home users are exploring Linux as a cheaper alternative to an email/letter writing/game appliance.
As to those "edge servers" that Linux is capturing, he may want to look at where all the tech logic is flowing: "edge servers". If web services and other distributed apps continue to grow for enterprise solutions, Linux is going to house most of those according to his logic. Just by identifying it doesn't seem to answer the issue of "what is your strategy?".
The whole price point comment seems too fluffy. Of course you have to look at what you're doing! Haven't you made up *any* clear strategy yet? If he'd said "we're going to show that Windows can scale, can be as secure and reliable, and that the value-added product it competitave with the leading vendors" I'd appreciate the interview. But he didn't.
Not really. It accepted a collection of SQL and returned multiple resutls in one pass. Granted, without the background about our process structure - I would agree with you on the info you've read, but it was very cool indeed.