Yeah, Lintel SMP sucked for a while, but that was partly because a lot of core stuff hadn't been SMP-ified, and it was back in a whole different era of kernel development.
I'd bet that the PPC SMP patch stuff goes _way_ smoother against the modern linux kernel source.
um, if you can listen to cdda on the drive, you can extract it. all (jesus, dont prove me wrong with a data only drive) drives do this
Actually, there probably are some older scsi drives that don't play audio. But more importantly, there's a difference between a CDROM's ability to play an audio CD and its ability to rip CDDA data.
When you "play an audio CD" on a standard old-school CDROM in a machine with some old soundblaster, the CDROM drive itself processes the CDDA data into an analog audio signal, which is then passed to the soundcard through that little CD audio cable like any line-level audio signal.
More modern drives have a "digital audio out", which does digitally encoded audio to the soundcard, but I'm not sure if it's really an exact copy of the CDDA data.
There's there Digital Audio Extraction (DAE), which is the ability of a drive to allow software to directly read the bitstream of an audio file from the CD disc as if it were a file. While most newer CDROMs support this feature on their buzzword list, many have compatibility problems in the real world, which makes finding a "good" CDROM drive for DAE (for converting later to MP3) a bitch sometimes.
As I said to the other naysayer (see other reply) Linux still wins in customizability and flexibility.
I still consider simple masquerading and true NAT different, although they are fundamentally the same thing.
I know IOS supports these things, but if it it ain't in IOS, you can't do it, it's a closed environment. In linux, my NAT could also scan packet contents of outbound SMTP traffic, and filter certain packets containing certain data through an external chunk of C code on the router itself that I wrote before processing it onwards... for a really wierd example (and yes, I've done that before).
Can your Cisco IOS based router/firewall redirect traffic through arbitrary software or filters on the router itself, that you can code yourself in C? Think about it, man. For a custom solution, Linux is infinitely more flexible. You can damn near do anything with a packet if you have the coding knowledge to take a whack at it. IOS is a closed environment.
THAT's what I meant, and I do know what I'm talking about
At least some corporation is standing up against this crap, even if it is in their economic interest.
We don't have to take this crap from these steenking artists any more.
Did the VCR destroy the movie industry? Did the tape recorder destroy the music industry? Did CD Burners kill the CD music business? Will the CD-ROM drives that allowed Digital Audio Extraction kill the CD market? Will MP3 do it either? Isn't this crap obvious??????!?!@#!@#
Why don't they work? It would seem to me that just about any fractal pattern (for example, the simple straightline triangle one), when recursed down like that on a blade, would give a many-many-fold increase in the "length" of blade edge running over a given object to be cut in a single pass.... I thought this was the advantage... a 5 inch knife blade that can cut as if a 50 foot blade was drug over something.
If they manage to get it working on the 4500 (admittedly, a different beast), that would be eve nmore useful. 4500 routers actually have a recently MIPS RISC 4xxx series CPU if I remember right.
Given the same hardware, I for one would much rather be using linux than IOS, and I'm sure others would agree. Linux is much more flexible and configurable, supports a wider range of "abnormal" routing/NATing/firewalling/MASQing options, etc...
Plus, It could give new life to old hardware. You could buy up some cheap EOL old Cisco's and use them as diskless network computers.
Using the crystals he produces, I could see making a diamond fractal blade, ala Gibson. It wouldn't have infinite recursion, but it could recurse from an inches-long visible outer pattern down to the nano-scale of his crystals. It would be far sharper than any conventional blade.
"Used to work for"... I would think that if you used to work for them, you have no obligation to do anything now. It was their job to make you sign patent agreements before you got out the door. I would suspect that:
A. If they didn't need you for the patent, they wouldn't be asking you... therefore they probably _need_ your signature.
B. There's a legal case to be made here. "We have the right to patent any invention you create while under our employ" is legal, assuming they tell you to sign the patent stuff while you still work there. The counter argument would be that if they didn't see your invention as useful enough to patent back when you invented it, that they can't go back and invoke this long after you're gone. Did the contract you signed during employement have any wording along the lines of: "You are required to assist us in obtaining patents on your inventions invented under our employ for X years after termination of employement?"
The GPL camp can play nice, it's especially nice that they're backporting. It sends a good message to non-GPL products that the GPL camp will still accept them warmly if they change their license, even if they do it fairly late.
It seems to me that this can be solved in the OS's locale support. For any program running setuid, or any program running as root, let the user be able to specify a locale value (say, EN_US), which then references a system-standard-location set of locale definitions. Don't allow setuid or root running programs to redefine things to be different than the installed set of locale definitions for the OS and/or that program.
This fix makes sense to me in the same way that it makes sense that most *nices don't allow setuid programs to pick up libraries from LD_LIBRARY_PATH.
If you can step out at 18/19/whatever and make a college grad's starting salary, and you feel you can grow your salary from there on at the same pace as a college grad, then there's no reason to go to school.
This does not mean anyone should skip college to work at an ISP or.com for $40K. That's stupid.
But if you know that you know your shit, and that college won't teach you much, and that you can prove these skills to your employer easily... and you can find an employer offering good money... do it.
I never attended college (well, I did, for about 3 weeks, then just walked off campus and left), instead going straight into tech jobs (not.com burnups) and I'm sitting here now at the age of 24, doing far better in every respect than the vast majority of grads I know.
The key differentiator boils down to:
Are you getting a great job and pay in return for you above-average abilities, or is some shmuck looking to hire you as cheap college-age labor for a tech company. Your $40K-ish jobs are very cheap investments for most employers....
My primary argument for "encrypt everything" is that it makes for better security for the important things you encrypt. If you send a large bulk of unencrypted traffic, then encrypt one important email... gee, it's real hard for the NSA to target the important stuff with $700 Billion in custom cracking equipment. OTOH, if everything is encrypted, the sheer volume of stuff to crack in order to search for "sensitive" items makes things more secure.
This is why host-to-host encryption should be standard issue at the hosts' IP stack.
Please don't forget a few things when considering all of this:
1. Integrity of Free Software. While this stuff is debatable in its specifics, it is definitely something to always keep in mind. The GPL virally and completely insures that our code doesn't get trapped into proprietary hands by commercial parties. Some of the Open Source licenses also do this to greater or lesser degrees. It should be obvious what the goal is here, and it should be of paramount importance.
2. RMS's role in the Open Source Movement. Please don't be so judgemental of RMS's words and actions. I don't agree with everything he says and does, like many people. But the Open Source movement is a revolution. Revolutions need extremists. We haven't won yet. When we win, we can replace the extremists with pragmatists and await the next revolution that will wash over us someday. Until then, extremists are a neccesary element to keep things going in the right direction.
I don't think so. Windows is the pre-eminent operating system of the modern age. Unix is some 70's technology that lived beyond its usefullness. Unix still works on cromagnon ideas like functional process priorities, truly protected multitasking, scalability, and conformance to open standards and APIs for interoperability.
Microsoft saw through all of this crud, and has produced what the modern age really needs: An operating system expressly designed for computers with one user, who's running one application, which is only available from one vendor, and is capable of consistently crashing and losing data so as to provide the user a safe direction in which to ventilate his frustration with his miserable life.
Well, I seem to remember Linux kernels for a long time now spewing a bootup message similar to:
POSIX conformance testing by UNIFIX.
So I'm thinking Linux as a kernel conforms to POSIX by testing, but perhaps not officially the way a commercial unix is.
I think the original point sounded like meeting POSIX standards was a subset of meeting these COE standards. POSIX is a nice set of unix-influenced, but certainly not unix-specific, standards. Microsloth needs to get on the ball and at the very least support the system call part of POSIX fully and correctly....
I understand your point there, but still... if it's running linux anyways... would i thave been all that much to ask just for this thing to also start an lpd server by default? We're talking one daemon with minimal configuration.... Unless there was some complication tying lpd into some custom print queueing software on the box... but I would imagine that the real story is that this box just uses stock unix print queues and something samba-ish to feed SMB print requests into it.
Slashdot Mirror
I'd bet that the PPC SMP patch stuff goes _way_ smoother against the modern linux kernel source.
When you "play an audio CD" on a standard old-school CDROM in a machine with some old soundblaster, the CDROM drive itself processes the CDDA data into an analog audio signal, which is then passed to the soundcard through that little CD audio cable like any line-level audio signal.
More modern drives have a "digital audio out", which does digitally encoded audio to the soundcard, but I'm not sure if it's really an exact copy of the CDDA data.
There's there Digital Audio Extraction (DAE), which is the ability of a drive to allow software to directly read the bitstream of an audio file from the CD disc as if it were a file. While most newer CDROMs support this feature on their buzzword list, many have compatibility problems in the real world, which makes finding a "good" CDROM drive for DAE (for converting later to MP3) a bitch sometimes.
I still consider simple masquerading and true NAT different, although they are fundamentally the same thing.
I know IOS supports these things, but if it it ain't in IOS, you can't do it, it's a closed environment. In linux, my NAT could also scan packet contents of outbound SMTP traffic, and filter certain packets containing certain data through an external chunk of C code on the router itself that I wrote before processing it onwards... for a really wierd example (and yes, I've done that before).
Can your Cisco IOS based router/firewall redirect traffic through arbitrary software or filters on the router itself, that you can code yourself in C? Think about it, man. For a custom solution, Linux is infinitely more flexible. You can damn near do anything with a packet if you have the coding knowledge to take a whack at it. IOS is a closed environment.
THAT's what I meant, and I do know what I'm talking about
We don't have to take this crap from these steenking artists any more.
Did the VCR destroy the movie industry? Did the tape recorder destroy the music industry? Did CD Burners kill the CD music business? Will the CD-ROM drives that allowed Digital Audio Extraction kill the CD market? Will MP3 do it either? Isn't this crap obvious??????!?!@#!@#
Plus, It could give new life to old hardware. You could buy up some cheap EOL old Cisco's and use them as diskless network computers.
He deserves +mod points for "creativity in trolling".
I especially liked "front-port hyperoptic coaxial" and "FTTC tech ... to be used in small, CAT5-based RCN clusters".
A. If they didn't need you for the patent, they wouldn't be asking you... therefore they probably _need_ your signature.
B. There's a legal case to be made here. "We have the right to patent any invention you create while under our employ" is legal, assuming they tell you to sign the patent stuff while you still work there. The counter argument would be that if they didn't see your invention as useful enough to patent back when you invented it, that they can't go back and invoke this long after you're gone. Did the contract you signed during employement have any wording along the lines of: "You are required to assist us in obtaining patents on your inventions invented under our employ for X years after termination of employement?"
You can fight this.
This fix makes sense to me in the same way that it makes sense that most *nices don't allow setuid programs to pick up libraries from LD_LIBRARY_PATH.
If you can step out at 18/19/whatever and make a college grad's starting salary, and you feel you can grow your salary from there on at the same pace as a college grad, then there's no reason to go to school.
This does not mean anyone should skip college to work at an ISP or .com for $40K. That's stupid.
But if you know that you know your shit, and that college won't teach you much, and that you can prove these skills to your employer easily... and you can find an employer offering good money... do it.
I never attended college (well, I did, for about 3 weeks, then just walked off campus and left), instead going straight into tech jobs (not .com burnups) and I'm sitting here now at the age of 24, doing far better in every respect than the vast majority of grads I know.
The key differentiator boils down to: Are you getting a great job and pay in return for you above-average abilities, or is some shmuck looking to hire you as cheap college-age labor for a tech company. Your $40K-ish jobs are very cheap investments for most employers....
Now that RSA is public domain, will GPG be adding the formerly-proprietary RSA algorithm?
This is why host-to-host encryption should be standard issue at the hosts' IP stack.
1. Integrity of Free Software. While this stuff is debatable in its specifics, it is definitely something to always keep in mind. The GPL virally and completely insures that our code doesn't get trapped into proprietary hands by commercial parties. Some of the Open Source licenses also do this to greater or lesser degrees. It should be obvious what the goal is here, and it should be of paramount importance.
2. RMS's role in the Open Source Movement. Please don't be so judgemental of RMS's words and actions. I don't agree with everything he says and does, like many people. But the Open Source movement is a revolution. Revolutions need extremists. We haven't won yet. When we win, we can replace the extremists with pragmatists and await the next revolution that will wash over us someday. Until then, extremists are a neccesary element to keep things going in the right direction.
Did you even read my post before replying?
Microsoft saw through all of this crud, and has produced what the modern age really needs: An operating system expressly designed for computers with one user, who's running one application, which is only available from one vendor, and is capable of consistently crashing and losing data so as to provide the user a safe direction in which to ventilate his frustration with his miserable life.
Well, I seem to remember Linux kernels for a long time now spewing a bootup message similar to: POSIX conformance testing by UNIFIX. So I'm thinking Linux as a kernel conforms to POSIX by testing, but perhaps not officially the way a commercial unix is.
I think the original point sounded like meeting POSIX standards was a subset of meeting these COE standards. POSIX is a nice set of unix-influenced, but certainly not unix-specific, standards. Microsloth needs to get on the ball and at the very least support the system call part of POSIX fully and correctly....
I understand your point there, but still... if it's running linux anyways... would i thave been all that much to ask just for this thing to also start an lpd server by default? We're talking one daemon with minimal configuration.... Unless there was some complication tying lpd into some custom print queueing software on the box... but I would imagine that the real story is that this box just uses stock unix print queues and something samba-ish to feed SMB print requests into it.
Thanks for the correction on my misunderstanding of black hole detection