This is almost exactly the same point that Richard Feynman made in regard to the first shuttle accident: they calculate failure statistics wrong and don't properly reinforce to guarantee against disaster. I believe his example went something like this:
If a suspension bridge is expected to handle 40,000 pounds of traffic on a daily basis without failing, but small cracks begin to appear after a month of usage at that weight, the bridge has failed. It is architecturally flawed, regardless of the fact that the bridge has not collapsed. If an O-ring is 1 inch thick and cracks 0.25 inches thick routinely appear in said O-ring, there is not a 75% margin of error; the O-ring has failed. A disaster has not occured, but the structural integrity has been compromised, even if it is well below the point of a catastrophic failure.
His point was that NASA had virtually ignored all non-catastrophic failures, instead seeing how far they were from being catastrophic and calling that difference the margin of error. The problem is, the design had failed, since those non-catastrophic failures were not supposed to have happened. Hence, depending upon a device which has already shown a tendency for non-catastrophic failures is no margin of error at all.
I'm probably doing injustice to his argument since he was a genius and I'm merely a Systems Administrator, but I think it's relevant.
I got modded down to -1 for saying the same thing, but you've said it more eloquently anyway. Any argument that claims inherent maleness or inherent femaleness based upon differences between the sexes is questionable if that difference is less than the difference among members of each sex. The validity is even more questionable if there is a large overlap between the two sexes.
For a synthetic example: if on a given test in a given pool the range of scores for men is 340 to 760 and the range of scores for women is 310 to 770, but the median score for men is 570 and for women 550, this does *NOT* mean that men are inherently better than women at that test. Yes, the midrange is higher, but the best women are significantly better than the average men, and the best men are significantly better than the average woman. Also, the difference between averages is only about 5% of the difference between top and bottom of each gender.
The example is synthetic, but I hope it makes the point, as it in fact illustrates the usual trend of sexist research.
Right on. Glad somebody had the sense to make this point. If I had moderator points, I'd mod you up. Sexist research is sexist research, and misapplication of Evolutionary concepts for social purposes does not change that.
This point has been surprisingly absent from the discussion...
Why in the name of $DEITY was the parent, my earlier post, moderated to -1, troll? There's nothing trolling about saying that I flatly reject studies that try to essentialize women as inferior to men at spatial thinking.
My argument was simply that, given that both men's and women's spatial abilities run the entire gamut, the fact that some average (and they don't say which) based on some study (and I'd like a lot more details about the "study") claims women as a group to have a 20% lower ability, leaves out a lot of other factors and makes a weak argument to me.
What sort of sexist moderators would rate my argument as troll? A moderator's job is not to rate whether they agree with the post, but to decide upon the validity of the argument.
Ah well, I have karma to burn anyway. Sad to see sexism alive and well in the world of computers.
This is just more essentialist crap. A statement like, "Women have a 20% lower spatial ability" or whatever it says is absurd, and here's why:
Men with good spatial sense would have nearly "perfect" spatial sense, whereas those with bad spatial sense have nearly *no* spatial sense. Same goes for women. The fact that on average (probably a mean, not a median, but any *average* could be used for that statement, including the irrational midrange or the pointless mode) men have a 20% higher spatial comprehension than women fades into statistical irrelevance considering that both sexes run the gamut. A significant proportion of women probably have better spatial comprehension than men, and a significant proportion of men probably have better spatial comprehension than women.
What's with the statement that it's just not right without a mouse?
Quake was the first Id game where a mouse even entered in to default controls. In Doom II, standard controls were the arrow keys for direction, to fire, to open things, and to side step. Sure, you could configure the controls in other ways (including a mouse? I'm not sure) but the main controls were keyboard-only.
Of course, I'm sure Doom III will have almost nothing to do with Doom II and will instead just be an extension of Quake III, but when I think Doom, I think *simple* controls. That was one of the things that made it a great game...
I just wanted to point out that if we accepted 11Mbps and 54Mbps as the speeds of 802.11b and 802.11a/g then we would have to call regular fast ethernet 200Mbps. 802.11b is 5.5Mbps full-duplex and a and g both are 27Mbps full duplex. It is true that the radio signals are capable of carrying 11 and 54 respectively, but half of this bandwidth is dedicated for each direction, so that the MAXIMUM one-way speed you can achieve with 802.11a/g is 27Mbps. This means that if they're hitting real-life numbers of 24Mbps (I doubt it) of data throughput, then they're doing really well - about 88% of theoretical. That's as good as you can really expect from wired networks, in terms of throughput to bandwidth ratios.
You know, a 0 is bigger than a 1, so who's to say the 0s aren't heavier? Think of how many more atoms it must take to write that 0, not to mention the increased time...
I would argue that pets.com did not do anything VERY well - I was a former customer of theirs, and I can assure you they were bound for trouble, based on my experience. My wife and I got a coupon (ironically from amazon.com, I think) worth $20 of free stuff with free shipping from pets.com, with no requirement to buy anything. So we bought a couple toys for our cats. They arrived the next day in a gigantic box - literally big enough to fit a mid-sized dorm refrigerator in (you know, the little 4.4 cu. ft ones). The products were small - a toy mouse and little plastic cat toy - so about 90% of the box was little bags full of air. The shipping cost $25, was delivered overnight, and the plastic toy was broken. So I called them up, and they overnighted me a new one. All told, they spent about $65 on a promotional gift that I could have bought locally for $6. Of course it didn't cost me a dime, but it didn't make me want to use their service, and it wasted their IPO money. THeir business model seems to have been very far from sound.
So amazon.com succeeded because their business model was sound and their products reasonable, whereas pets.com failed because their business model was unsound and their products not the sort of thing that can generate huge revenue.
Of course google doesn't directly sell a product anyway - they give their main product away in return for ad revenue and the like - so really they're not even directly comparable anyway. Slashdot's "business model" is much more like google, but of course groups like yahoo are probably the best comparisons.
I think a lot of techies would jump at the chance to buy google stock. However, there's a lot to be said for the freedom that being private gives them. I'd hate to see google turn into a big Evil corporation...
I would argue that Red Hat 7.3 *is* a current release of red hat as much as my Solaris 2.8 install is a current release of Solaris. Both are currently supported, both are one generation back from the newest, and both are still actively developed. That seems an awful lot like a comparison of a current product with a current product. Besides, I haven't noticed any significant improvements in font rendering in either Redhat 8.0 vs. Redhat 7.3 or Solaris 2.9 vs. Solaris 2.8.
Oh, and there never was such a thing as Solaris 3.
I don't know much about this whole thing. All I know is that I use a Sun for my desktop instead of my RedHat 7.3 box precisely because Sun's fonts are so much better than the ones in RedHat 7.3. Fonts in Solaris are substantially comparable to those in Windows, whereas those in Red Hat still lag behind.
Whether this has any bearing on the specific issue of XFT2 vs. STSF, I don't know. Perhaps the proposed STSF doesn't even resemble the font set in Solaris, and perhaps my RedHat font issues have nothing to do with XFT2. But regardless, I use Solaris on my desktop for font reasons, and I'm more likely to trust Sun's fonts than OSS ones simply because of my prior experience.
Of course sometimes prior experience can cause people to be stubborn, ignorant and misinformed. I'll hope that's not the case here...
No, the original poster is correct. It should be "downloading DVDs is illegal" because the verb "is" refers to the infinitive "downloading" not the direct object of the infinitive, "DVDs". An infinitive is always singular, eg "Walking is fun" and not "Walking are fun".
The implication is supposed to be that "It is illegal to download DVDs", and not that "DVDs which download things are illegal".
I get academic pricing and I'm not sure if it's NDA or not. However, based on list prices, here's a basic sunray setup using a V100:
Sun P/N Part Name Price N19-UUE1-9S-256EXW Netra V100 995.00 BAE-100-00 Sun Ray 1 525.00 (or less than 50 on ebay) CECIS-200-992S 1-client RTU 95.00 CECMS-200C99MS Sunray Media 35.00
I had a nice table but the lameness filter killed it. Sorry, it's kind of ugly now.
A couple notes: first, the V100 will only really run about 5 or 6 sunrays before it starts really bogging down under the load. The config above includes 256 MB of RAM; you'll want to up that to at least 1024 but you can get the (standard but not common) memory at crucial.com for much less than Sun charges. The base configuration includes a 40GB 7200 RPM IDE disk, which is drastically more than you need unless you plan to keep all your user data there too. It can safely be swapped with any industry-standard IDE disk (cable select mode).
Second, the regular price for Sunray 1 clients is drastically more than I remembered - buy them on ebay for $40 each instead. They are the headless kind but work with any standard monitor.
Thirdly, Solaris 9 is a free download and free RTU for personal use. The V100 comes preinstalled and is fine out of the box for beginners, but I recommend that you reinstall before a sunray installation.
Finally, sunray software prior to 2.0 required a private network. 2.0 no longer requires this, but I would recommend that sunrays be behind a firewall if they're not on a private network - I don't know how much sunray code gets audited, since the *normal* install involves a private network.
Unfortunately, the current implementation of sunray software wouldn't be able to handle that - it needs just about every last bit of a 10Mbps lan connection to function well. A sunray on the other side of a 1.5Mbps WAN connection from its server would have woefully poor performance. On the other hand, Sunray software 1.3 was useless without a 100Mbps link, and 2.0 has reduced that drastically to 10Mbps, so perhaps a future version would be more bandwidth-efficient...
The Netra is about $1500 as equipped, and the sunrays are only about $200 each with academic discount. More expensive than a single PC, but less than four PCs! The Netra X1 (the current V100) is a really lowball sun, and it really shouldn't be used for more than five or six sunrays. The T1 (V120) can handle about ten, but for any more you have to shell out the big bucks and get a 280R (~$5000 starting). As long as you keep the number of sunrays low, it's pretty cheap. The most expensive part is the sunray software (I think about $500 if you have to pay full price).
I agree that MS Office is still (at this point) better than Openorffice/staroffice. However, the main point is that openoffice has a lot of potential *and* it's open-source and uses standards for the file saves. I use staroffice for all my word processing, and when I hit a bug (it's getting far less common now) I send in a bug report. Sure, right now it puts me out a little; but not much, and I'm contributing to something that has potential to far outshine MS office very soon.
In terms of the word processor, Star writer (the OO/SO wp) is nearly as feature-rich and almost exactly as good as MS Word. The others lag quite a bit, but the word processor is the most important in terms of getting wide acceptance.
Not two years ago my boss was telling me that all our machines had to be Suns because they were "more mature, all of the many minor kinks that plague [linux] are ironed out." Guess what? Today we use linux for everything that does not specifically require Sun, because those kinks were ironed out. We'll see the same thing with OO/SO I'm sure.
I have a Sun Netra X1 in my basement feeding four sunrays throughout my house. It's really very nice - I can move from room to room and my session goes with me so long as I have my card. I use the sunrays for word processing, music, video, pretty much everything except video games, for which I have a Winblows box in the basement.
It's really nice, but the Sunray really isn't aimed for home users - I'm an abherration. They're really business TCO-reducers. They require an experienced UNIX systems admin to install and maintain, and they provide a standard UNIX CDE/gnome desktop. Since I'm a full-time Solaris Systems admin during the day and I maintain sunrays for work, it's really simple for me to use them at home. Not so for the proverbial joe sixpack and his wife.
Though I love the sunrays, the whole system would have to be prepackaged and simplified drastically before they would make sense for the average home user(maybe with the Cobalt Raq stuff). I imagine that this new vision of McNealy's must be something totally different.
I just got home from work and looked up my sources - I was wrong. The treaty was signed in 1967 when it became clear that the US or USSR would be there shortly. Still, the basic point is, nobody thought about worrying about such things until the problem was imminent; in 1963, nobody had even thought of this.
I am an historian, but I'm not an American Historian (I stufy France). So my details may be off, but...
The flag-planting on the moon on 20 July 1969 did in fact claim the moon for the United States - by international convention, the moon belonged to the United States at that moment. However, since ownership of celestial bodies had never been in the realm of the possible before, and since such a claim would *drastically* change the dynamics of the Cold War, the United Nations met shortly thereafter to discuss such matters and decided that the moon could not be claimed by any nation. So the United States' land mass went back to its previous size.
Generally, I think all relevant experience should go on a resume, including this kind of avocational programming and project work.
My only concern is that by alerting your potential employer to such projects you might find Intellectual Property issues - they might claim that such work is their IP and not yours, and/or they might write this into your contract.
This may seem overly paranoid, and it's a judgment call you'll have to make. I work for a University so IP is not really a concern, but when my wife worked in the corporate world there was some concern about off-time work that was substantially similar to her corporate work, and the definition of *substantially similar* can be pretty sketchy...
Figures they'd screw up the first post in a while that interests me...
So I'll post my own question, guessing what the post was supposed to be: I'm in the market for a digital multitrack, but since I'll be recording my wife's voice, a guitar and keyboard, I shouldn't need more than four tracks. I've seen lots of expensive digital 8-track and 16-track recorders, but a simple, high-quality digital equivalent of the old casette four-tracks (we own one of the casette types) would be really nice and would save some money. So what do people recommend?
No, he had a Netra t 105 - it's a 1U, very proprietary server. So yes, it is standard SCSI for the connection, but the drive itself is an oddball ultralow form factor device with special rails to slide right into place. You wouldn't expect your laptop to use any standard IDE CD-ROM would you? Sure it's IDE, but it's not a 5.25" HH bay.
Slashdot Mirror
This is almost exactly the same point that Richard Feynman made in regard to the first shuttle accident: they calculate failure statistics wrong and don't properly reinforce to guarantee against disaster. I believe his example went something like this:
If a suspension bridge is expected to handle 40,000 pounds of traffic on a daily basis without failing, but small cracks begin to appear after a month of usage at that weight, the bridge has failed. It is architecturally flawed, regardless of the fact that the bridge has not collapsed. If an O-ring is 1 inch thick and cracks 0.25 inches thick routinely appear in said O-ring, there is not a 75% margin of error; the O-ring has failed. A disaster has not occured, but the structural integrity has been compromised, even if it is well below the point of a catastrophic failure.
His point was that NASA had virtually ignored all non-catastrophic failures, instead seeing how far they were from being catastrophic and calling that difference the margin of error. The problem is, the design had failed, since those non-catastrophic failures were not supposed to have happened. Hence, depending upon a device which has already shown a tendency for non-catastrophic failures is no margin of error at all.
I'm probably doing injustice to his argument since he was a genius and I'm merely a Systems Administrator, but I think it's relevant.
I got modded down to -1 for saying the same thing, but you've said it more eloquently anyway. Any argument that claims inherent maleness or inherent femaleness based upon differences between the sexes is questionable if that difference is less than the difference among members of each sex. The validity is even more questionable if there is a large overlap between the two sexes.
For a synthetic example: if on a given test in a given pool the range of scores for men is 340 to 760 and the range of scores for women is 310 to 770, but the median score for men is 570 and for women 550, this does *NOT* mean that men are inherently better than women at that test. Yes, the midrange is higher, but the best women are significantly better than the average men, and the best men are significantly better than the average woman. Also, the difference between averages is only about 5% of the difference between top and bottom of each gender.
The example is synthetic, but I hope it makes the point, as it in fact illustrates the usual trend of sexist research.
Right on. Glad somebody had the sense to make this point. If I had moderator points, I'd mod you up. Sexist research is sexist research, and misapplication of Evolutionary concepts for social purposes does not change that.
This point has been surprisingly absent from the discussion...
Why in the name of $DEITY was the parent, my earlier post, moderated to -1, troll? There's nothing trolling about saying that I flatly reject studies that try to essentialize women as inferior to men at spatial thinking.
My argument was simply that, given that both men's and women's spatial abilities run the entire gamut, the fact that some average (and they don't say which) based on some study (and I'd like a lot more details about the "study") claims women as a group to have a 20% lower ability, leaves out a lot of other factors and makes a weak argument to me.
What sort of sexist moderators would rate my argument as troll? A moderator's job is not to rate whether they agree with the post, but to decide upon the validity of the argument.
Ah well, I have karma to burn anyway. Sad to see sexism alive and well in the world of computers.
This is just more essentialist crap. A statement like, "Women have a 20% lower spatial ability" or whatever it says is absurd, and here's why:
Men with good spatial sense would have nearly "perfect" spatial sense, whereas those with bad spatial sense have nearly *no* spatial sense. Same goes for women. The fact that on average (probably a mean, not a median, but any *average* could be used for that statement, including the irrational midrange or the pointless mode) men have a 20% higher spatial comprehension than women fades into statistical irrelevance considering that both sexes run the gamut. A significant proportion of women probably have better spatial comprehension than men, and a significant proportion of men probably have better spatial comprehension than women.
Dumbass study.
What's with the statement that it's just not right without a mouse?
Quake was the first Id game where a mouse even entered in to default controls. In Doom II, standard controls were the arrow keys for direction, to fire, to open things, and to side step. Sure, you could configure the controls in other ways (including a mouse? I'm not sure) but the main controls were keyboard-only.
Of course, I'm sure Doom III will have almost nothing to do with Doom II and will instead just be an extension of Quake III, but when I think Doom, I think *simple* controls. That was one of the things that made it a great game...
I just wanted to point out that if we accepted 11Mbps and 54Mbps as the speeds of 802.11b and 802.11a/g then we would have to call regular fast ethernet 200Mbps. 802.11b is 5.5Mbps full-duplex and a and g both are 27Mbps full duplex. It is true that the radio signals are capable of carrying 11 and 54 respectively, but half of this bandwidth is dedicated for each direction, so that the MAXIMUM one-way speed you can achieve with 802.11a/g is 27Mbps. This means that if they're hitting real-life numbers of 24Mbps (I doubt it) of data throughput, then they're doing really well - about 88% of theoretical. That's as good as you can really expect from wired networks, in terms of throughput to bandwidth ratios.
You know, a 0 is bigger than a 1, so who's to say the 0s aren't heavier? Think of how many more atoms it must take to write that 0, not to mention the increased time...
I think most PFYs on /. these days would miss the obvious Flying Circus reference.
Yup. You beat me by just a few seconds - I would have typed faster if I hadn't cut my finger yesterday. So near, yet so far. :-P
I would argue that pets.com did not do anything VERY well - I was a former customer of theirs, and I can assure you they were bound for trouble, based on my experience. My wife and I got a coupon (ironically from amazon.com, I think) worth $20 of free stuff with free shipping from pets.com, with no requirement to buy anything. So we bought a couple toys for our cats. They arrived the next day in a gigantic box - literally big enough to fit a mid-sized dorm refrigerator in (you know, the little 4.4 cu. ft ones). The products were small - a toy mouse and little plastic cat toy - so about 90% of the box was little bags full of air. The shipping cost $25, was delivered overnight, and the plastic toy was broken. So I called them up, and they overnighted me a new one. All told, they spent about $65 on a promotional gift that I could have bought locally for $6. Of course it didn't cost me a dime, but it didn't make me want to use their service, and it wasted their IPO money. THeir business model seems to have been very far from sound.
So amazon.com succeeded because their business model was sound and their products reasonable, whereas pets.com failed because their business model was unsound and their products not the sort of thing that can generate huge revenue.
Of course google doesn't directly sell a product anyway - they give their main product away in return for ad revenue and the like - so really they're not even directly comparable anyway. Slashdot's "business model" is much more like google, but of course groups like yahoo are probably the best comparisons.
I think a lot of techies would jump at the chance to buy google stock. However, there's a lot to be said for the freedom that being private gives them. I'd hate to see google turn into a big Evil corporation...
BTW, I think I'm fp.
I would argue that Red Hat 7.3 *is* a current release of red hat as much as my Solaris 2.8 install is a current release of Solaris. Both are currently supported, both are one generation back from the newest, and both are still actively developed. That seems an awful lot like a comparison of a current product with a current product. Besides, I haven't noticed any significant improvements in font rendering in either Redhat 8.0 vs. Redhat 7.3 or Solaris 2.9 vs. Solaris 2.8.
Oh, and there never was such a thing as Solaris 3.
I don't know much about this whole thing. All I know is that I use a Sun for my desktop instead of my RedHat 7.3 box precisely because Sun's fonts are so much better than the ones in RedHat 7.3. Fonts in Solaris are substantially comparable to those in Windows, whereas those in Red Hat still lag behind.
Whether this has any bearing on the specific issue of XFT2 vs. STSF, I don't know. Perhaps the proposed STSF doesn't even resemble the font set in Solaris, and perhaps my RedHat font issues have nothing to do with XFT2. But regardless, I use Solaris on my desktop for font reasons, and I'm more likely to trust Sun's fonts than OSS ones simply because of my prior experience.
Of course sometimes prior experience can cause people to be stubborn, ignorant and misinformed. I'll hope that's not the case here...
No, the original poster is correct. It should be "downloading DVDs is illegal" because the verb "is" refers to the infinitive "downloading" not the direct object of the infinitive, "DVDs". An infinitive is always singular, eg "Walking is fun" and not "Walking are fun".
The implication is supposed to be that "It is illegal to download DVDs", and not that "DVDs which download things are illegal".
I get academic pricing and I'm not sure if it's NDA or not. However, based on list prices, here's a basic sunray setup using a V100:
Sun P/N Part Name Price
N19-UUE1-9S-256EXW Netra V100 995.00
BAE-100-00 Sun Ray 1 525.00 (or less than 50 on ebay)
CECIS-200-992S 1-client RTU 95.00
CECMS-200C99MS Sunray Media 35.00
I had a nice table but the lameness filter killed it. Sorry, it's kind of ugly now.
A couple notes: first, the V100 will only really run about 5 or 6 sunrays before it starts really bogging down under the load. The config above includes 256 MB of RAM; you'll want to up that to at least 1024 but you can get the (standard but not common) memory at crucial.com for much less than Sun charges. The base configuration includes a 40GB 7200 RPM IDE disk, which is drastically more than you need unless you plan to keep all your user data there too. It can safely be swapped with any industry-standard IDE disk (cable select mode).
Second, the regular price for Sunray 1 clients is drastically more than I remembered - buy them on ebay for $40 each instead. They are the headless kind but work with any standard monitor.
Thirdly, Solaris 9 is a free download and free RTU for personal use. The V100 comes preinstalled and is fine out of the box for beginners, but I recommend that you reinstall before a sunray installation.
Finally, sunray software prior to 2.0 required a private network. 2.0 no longer requires this, but I would recommend that sunrays be behind a firewall if they're not on a private network - I don't know how much sunray code gets audited, since the *normal* install involves a private network.
Unfortunately, the current implementation of sunray software wouldn't be able to handle that - it needs just about every last bit of a 10Mbps lan connection to function well. A sunray on the other side of a 1.5Mbps WAN connection from its server would have woefully poor performance. On the other hand, Sunray software 1.3 was useless without a 100Mbps link, and 2.0 has reduced that drastically to 10Mbps, so perhaps a future version would be more bandwidth-efficient...
The Netra is about $1500 as equipped, and the sunrays are only about $200 each with academic discount. More expensive than a single PC, but less than four PCs! The Netra X1 (the current V100) is a really lowball sun, and it really shouldn't be used for more than five or six sunrays. The T1 (V120) can handle about ten, but for any more you have to shell out the big bucks and get a 280R (~$5000 starting). As long as you keep the number of sunrays low, it's pretty cheap. The most expensive part is the sunray software (I think about $500 if you have to pay full price).
I agree that MS Office is still (at this point) better than Openorffice/staroffice. However, the main point is that openoffice has a lot of potential *and* it's open-source and uses standards for the file saves. I use staroffice for all my word processing, and when I hit a bug (it's getting far less common now) I send in a bug report. Sure, right now it puts me out a little; but not much, and I'm contributing to something that has potential to far outshine MS office very soon.
In terms of the word processor, Star writer (the OO/SO wp) is nearly as feature-rich and almost exactly as good as MS Word. The others lag quite a bit, but the word processor is the most important in terms of getting wide acceptance.
Not two years ago my boss was telling me that all our machines had to be Suns because they were "more mature, all of the many minor kinks that plague [linux] are ironed out." Guess what? Today we use linux for everything that does not specifically require Sun, because those kinks were ironed out. We'll see the same thing with OO/SO I'm sure.
I have a Sun Netra X1 in my basement feeding four sunrays throughout my house. It's really very nice - I can move from room to room and my session goes with me so long as I have my card. I use the sunrays for word processing, music, video, pretty much everything except video games, for which I have a Winblows box in the basement.
It's really nice, but the Sunray really isn't aimed for home users - I'm an abherration. They're really business TCO-reducers. They require an experienced UNIX systems admin to install and maintain, and they provide a standard UNIX CDE/gnome desktop. Since I'm a full-time Solaris Systems admin during the day and I maintain sunrays for work, it's really simple for me to use them at home. Not so for the proverbial joe sixpack and his wife.
Though I love the sunrays, the whole system would have to be prepackaged and simplified drastically before they would make sense for the average home user(maybe with the Cobalt Raq stuff). I imagine that this new vision of McNealy's must be something totally different.
I just got home from work and looked up my sources - I was wrong. The treaty was signed in 1967 when it became clear that the US or USSR would be there shortly. Still, the basic point is, nobody thought about worrying about such things until the problem was imminent; in 1963, nobody had even thought of this.
I am an historian, but I'm not an American Historian (I stufy France). So my details may be off, but...
The flag-planting on the moon on 20 July 1969 did in fact claim the moon for the United States - by international convention, the moon belonged to the United States at that moment. However, since ownership of celestial bodies had never been in the realm of the possible before, and since such a claim would *drastically* change the dynamics of the Cold War, the United Nations met shortly thereafter to discuss such matters and decided that the moon could not be claimed by any nation. So the United States' land mass went back to its previous size.
Generally, I think all relevant experience should go on a resume, including this kind of avocational programming and project work.
My only concern is that by alerting your potential employer to such projects you might find Intellectual Property issues - they might claim that such work is their IP and not yours, and/or they might write this into your contract.
This may seem overly paranoid, and it's a judgment call you'll have to make. I work for a University so IP is not really a concern, but when my wife worked in the corporate world there was some concern about off-time work that was substantially similar to her corporate work, and the definition of *substantially similar* can be pretty sketchy...
Figures they'd screw up the first post in a while that interests me...
So I'll post my own question, guessing what the post was supposed to be: I'm in the market for a digital multitrack, but since I'll be recording my wife's voice, a guitar and keyboard, I shouldn't need more than four tracks. I've seen lots of expensive digital 8-track and 16-track recorders, but a simple, high-quality digital equivalent of the old casette four-tracks (we own one of the casette types) would be really nice and would save some money. So what do people recommend?
No, he had a Netra t 105 - it's a 1U, very proprietary server. So yes, it is standard SCSI for the connection, but the drive itself is an oddball ultralow form factor device with special rails to slide right into place. You wouldn't expect your laptop to use any standard IDE CD-ROM would you? Sure it's IDE, but it's not a 5.25" HH bay.