I totally agree with the usefullness of disk storage... I have personally so many uses...
I am a photographer. raw photos I take are easily 100MB. In a photoshoot i easily take 50 to... 400... Once I work on them in photoshop I do like keeping the originals PSDs, which very often amounts to 500MB or more PER PHOTO. I try to usually limit to 500MB because of disk space and my computer/drive gets too slow. Image if each photo I work are 500MB. I could only store 2 of my originals per GB of space... Now imagine I want to store different revisions... I used to have a 250GB drive, mirrored. Got filled up very quickly.
I don't care about music, but I am also into video editing and archiving. 12GB/hour is what my camera require for disk space.
Oh yes, I do have a mythtv box that I am currently building, I can't imagine how much diskspace I may want to this, and in total.
so yes. bring on disk space. I will never have enough and will always find a way to fill it up - LEGALLY. I am probably going to upgrade my 900GB file server (4x300GB, raid 5) i have at home and replace all the drives with 750GB. It is probably going to last me 6 months to a year?
but it is true that for most people there is no need for such amount of space. my parents have plenty of space... and they only have 80GB...
That is my assumption... I used to work for Register.com and we were having a HUGE number of parked domains and redirected domains served by Linux. Basically Microsoft approached us and offered us a pile of cash AND some of their engineers to help so we migrate the servers serving this (futurestep it was called if i remember right) to Windows and that they can use that as advertisement AND that netcraft would show a significant change in the number of sites hosted by Windows.... Let's say that it was very hard to refuse this...
So yeah... I would assume the same. How much money/services did they got from Microsoft?
My vision is a convergence of phone/data/tv and all communications channels/ways to data services. Phone companies will not matter anymore. Data companies will.
At the end, in a couple of years, or decade(s) all traditionnal phone lines will dissapear replaces with data-lines, high speed fibers directly to each home. 10G wireless networks will be capable of over 100mbps directly to any wireless devices. Secure IPv6 will be the norm so each device in the world can be uniquely identified.
There will be phone adapters so people can receive their phone conversations. They will be able to have those calls follow them wherever they are, from a handset to be transfered to a headset, bluetooth (or whatever technology they will be wearing), to the car communication system, to the desktop, back to the handset - without a hitch to the communication.
There will be video adapters so that people can start watching a show/movie from their either live tv or recorded, change room, take their pda or smart-phones, leave the room and continue watching the show, live. They will be able to take their portable entertainment center with them, keep on watching their shows in their cars on their ways to grandma. Arriving there, they will have access to their entire movie collection, photos, document, etc as if they were home. Where you are doesn't matter. You will have access to all your information. Even more futuristic but totally possible, all your data will be encrypted using your own DNA as the key so wherever you are access to your data IS guaranteed confidential.
Actual phone companies if they want to survive will have transform themselves from phone companies to data/services companies, providing multiple services, data, voice, video, tv, radio, etc... to their customers.
ah... I am a dreamer... but then... who knows? It may very well happen. The question is. When?
Let's say inventor A have the idea of a way of doing something. He patents it. Doesn't use it, and sit on it.
Inventor B a bit later, wants to do the same thing and OH, strange thing, think of the same way of doing it! A & B never talked to each other, and just saw a problem, found the same solution. 1+1=2 right? if I ask you what should I add to 1 to get to 2? how many answers?
Example: - I think of the invention of a door with a handle. to open the door I have to push it so it gets out of my way. I patent that. but I never make a door. - Someone else decide of making a door... and think, "how making I can make a door that can be pushed and it opens". how many ways is there of opening a door?
More than 2 people, not even smart, can come with the same idea about the same way of doing the same thing without concerting each other and even knowing about each other? It is ridiculous. Why should one be awarded a patent, and not the other?
Sorry, I am against THIS. Some ideas are obvious, if it is process, a software, a mathematical formula, something relatively obvious, it SHOULD NOT be patentable.
- Small factor that I could carry with me in my pocket. Pants pocket preferred, but I could settle for belt or jacket. - Cell phone with high speed wireless access (GPRS, EDGE, UMTS, etc...) - Possibility to be ONLINE, connected AND one or more phone conversation simultaneously. - VoIP client integrated to it. - form factor with small keyboard for basic on the go work. - OS should be easily upgradable - sensitive screen so I can take notes on it with an integrated pen. - Blue tooth, wifi, and all possible wireless technologies. - Bluetooth should have all profiles enabled, file transfer, keyboard/mouse, headset, A2DP (bluetooth 2.0). - Infrared receiver/emitter. - Should be able to control it by voice as an option. Say Bluetooth headset with either a push-to-talk feature or automatic recognition. CONFIGURABLE. - (mini )vga-port (wireless option?) so a full size screen can be connected. - My favorite feature would be full wireless connectivity so when I arrive at my desk, my screen keyboards and all automatically connects to it and I could use it as my desktop. - Automatic wireless backup on another computer whenever possible. - Full encryption of content in case of loss. - Security by either fingerprint/iris scan/etc... - battery life of 10 hours when not plugged on power. - Integrated GPS.
I think I am pretty much complete. Any more ideas? HP are you listening?
I wish I could work in a research center. I would have a lot of fun and ideas....
In theory it could be possible to encrypt them. But there are a few things to consider...
- My understanding is that vonage use SIP. SIP works over port 5060 usually. As long as traffic is seen on these ports it can be blocked no matter if encrypted or not. - Encrypting the traffic would have 2 consequences: -- adding a few milliseconds delay because of the encryption loop. -- adding load on the servers, both your client (which in this case would be negligeable), but especially on the vonage servers. It would probably require some hardware upgrade and hardware encryption capabilities to make it acceptable
My recommendation would be, but it wouldn't be compliant with SIP anymore... To have a SIP connection negotiation doing the following: (maybe should make for another RFC...) - SIP connections should be negotiated completely over SSL (or an encrypted layer as long as it works with both UDP and TCP regardless of the protocol) - During those connections the ports numbers on both ends can be negotiated and choosen at 'random'. As they are encrypted carriers would have no ways of knowing them. - The whole connection is encrypted. - Ports can change and be renegotiated during the connection. - Encryption keys can be changed and renegotiated during the connection. - Provide different levels of encryption. Could adapt to network load: favorize security over encryption overhead, or the reverse.
I am pretty sure all of this could work very well if done properly.
If there could be an addentum to the SIP specs for this, that would be I think perfect. I know that if I were to design any VoIP protocol at this point, or P2P applications, etc... It would be my basis.
Well... sure... I agree with current infrastructure... But... If we could live in a dream world... There is still the experimental (for life??) multicast network... It was created to solve these problems. But it's been experimental for....... If companies were to push for it. It could work and solve all the problems.
yes... maybe Yahoo doesn't like it because they have to pay royalties to Microsoft for the DRM technologies? Going unrestricted means: - no royalties for a DRM system to pay - systems easier to implement - customers more satisfied - good for the image...
The don't own any DRM technology, and thus have no interest in such, adding some only frustrates customers and make them look bad. These days, they only want Google to look bad;)
I spent almost $9000 a few years ago an a HDTV compatible projector (a Sanyo PLV70). It has a DVI input, but oh wait. I can't even connect it to my HDTV receiver from Timewarner. It says it misses content protection thing. Right.... So I connect it using component. I do love the quality of the image, it is amazing. Even compared with today's projectors it does seem to do the job pretty well. Besides the fact that it is a rather big projector, but then it is hidden, I don't see ANY reason to change it. Except if one day I move to a smaller place, I would buy a Plasma TV.
I wish people like me had something they could do. All those protection mechanism systems are just insane. At the end they are useless and they only annoy people. The result of this? I will NOT be buying a HD-DVD player, unless I know it has been unlocked and support full resolution on the component... Everybody should do the same.
Why not a community based p2p client/network ?
on
Razorback2 Servers Seized
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
Why can't we, as an opensource community create a real completely decentralized p2p network? I have been thinking of doing this for a while and do have a lot of ideas for this. I have been online for 14 years and have seen a lot. After all we all know the problems with existing p2p networks from the past years:
- It has to be truly decentralized. No main server. Whatsoever. Except websites to download clients. It has to be able to discover new clients/networks/etc... - Specs have to be open so anyone can implement a client. - It has to be secured. Using SSL for example. - It has to work from behind firewalls. - It has to be secure enough to differentiate dups and fake files. - Searches have to be decentralized, but cached, and verified for integrity. - Of course, it has to be ad-free/spyware-free. - It has to be built upon security, safety/integrity of the files and users in mind. - Most of all, it has to be thought off as a legal project with legal uses so it can't be stopped.
I see no reason why this can't be implemented as a community effort? I have been a project manager for years, and for one would be willing to work/coordinate on such a project.
Aren't you scared to reboot it? I would be. Are you running any mission critical thing on it? I hope not, I wouldn't think you are if you did not know about the server?
Either way, a server with that uptime is a great testament for Unix stability but then, what would a windows machine do that would be unused for 5 years? Also... I would be scared to reboot this machine, hardware failure at reboot?
I get this kind of calls all the time, at least once or twice a week. Typical. I always ask when I can call them back and they always tell me that they share an office or something and they will call me back at my convenience.
Most of the time they are quite rude and pushy, to very pushy. In addition to the phone connection being horrible, such a lag and bad quality, it just doesn't look professional. If they were nice and agreable with a decent phone quality, maybe I would deal with them, a big MAYBE.
Then.... I have a general question... like I have, and I am sure a lot of people have, I have a 'modded' dvd player. It removes the macrovision signal and other goodies... Why can't we have some modded blueray players? Or HD-DVD players in the future?
Gigabit switches are pretty cheap these days. I rewired my home network, 7 machines with a gigabit switched network. I paid about $80 for a 8 ports gigabit.
My windows machines are loving accessing my file server on the network now! Though now it is getting time to buy a 16 ports switch and to upgrade the wireless network too. My 11b connection is getting too slow to work on the laptops...
I probably would have no need for a 100gigabit network at home... not yet... but I know some a company that were maxing out their gigabit link to internet. They just did an upgrade to 10 gigabit (2 links for redundancy of course)... and with the growth they are experiencing... 100gigabit wouldn't be out of the question for them in a few years...
The patents in questions are likely to be rejected. The whole object of this lawsuit are those patents.
How can the judge dismiss that? What if he awards the injunction, either forces to close or settle. One way or another. What will happen if/when the patents ARE rejected? Because the lawsuit would have been on invalid ground?
Why can't this new evidence taken into account for the lawsuit? I don't understand this law aberation. Why can't the judge either order to wait to know the result of the patent re-examination, or forces the PTO to re-examine faster and be a party in the lawsuit?
I just don't understand why this lawsuit is going on ground (patents) that are likely to be dismissed and deemed invalid. Because if I understand right, patents not valid = lawsuit not founded anymore.
Well, yes, for you, but there are some companies out there that are sending millions of legetimate emails a day...
I have interviewed for one some time ago. I am completely against spam, and do agree that their business is very legit. The only problem for them I can think of is that they send free daily newsletter to their customers. Their customers EXPECT these newsletters because they are on a very specific topic and are subscribed. From my understanding they are sending over a million emails to AOL addresses a day and growing... They are already on some whitelist from AOL which already complained of the amount of _legetimate_ email they send.
Now when you think about it. Those emails were signed-in BY the customers and are free. Who should pay? Should it be part of the customer's unlimited package? After all they have free 'unlimited' web surfing and all right? They are already paying for it part of their unlimited subscription package. Why should it be different?
In what is it different from Bellsouth requiring providers like google to pay for the traffic going to their end users??
It really depends on the headhunters. I have found 2 jobs so far with some and the experiences were different. I would think it depends on the market and the recruiter's interest. In one case the recruiter was hands-off and let me do the salary negotiation and everything. In the other case he said that I should not do that he will take care of it.
One thing I know, is that when they need you and they have a job for you, the really know how to call you... but once you've been rejected of that job for any reason, they tend to forget about you... Unless by a miracle they remember your name a few months later when another opportunity come up.
I also had my resume on Monster, Dice.com, hotjobs, etc... I was trying to apply directly with the companies, but I would say that recruiters got me 90% of the interviews I have been. Though I do find it easier sometime when you can do it without them. I have had a job that slipped out because the company found another candidate by himself, and although he liked me very much he said he choose to not pay the 25% agency fee... It can get expensive for some smaller companies especially on 6 digits salaries.
It would be a never ending situation if they were to start paying.
If they start paying for one ISP. What would prevent another one for asking for fees? and another one? and another one? Everyone could ask for their share. It would hurt google, or any other content companies badly... and the consumers by association. ME!
Take the example of a random company, let's say... Linksys, a publicaly traded company, owned by Cisco.
They release an appliance with Linux in it... They don't release the source code. It is GPL. They are in violation of Sarbannes Oxley. It's a big deal if this is discovered, could put them into trouble. It is probably the best way to force a company to comply with the GPL.
Now it is too bad it only applies to publicaly traded companies...
There is never enough space... I guess I am one of those people. I only want top quality.
Unfortunately for me, I am in videographer, as well as a photographer, and a video collector.
When I work on photoshop on some photos. I always work from the original 16MP, 16bits photos from my camera, right there it is already 96MB. It isn't rare that when I save it in.psd that the photo is between 300 to 600MB when you add the layers and etc... Considering that when I do a photoshoot I might have 10 to 20 images I will rework on.... It takes up a lot of space.
Then on the other end, I also do video editing. From mini-dv, it is about 12GB/hour. You can also fill up a harddrive very quickly with this. And it is not even the new hires cam you can get.
I also used to like putting all my DVDs, uncompressed on my computer so I could have the best quality video/audio watching them on my projector.
so see... i have 2TB of storage at home, and it is full... Backup is an headache. I can't wait to add another 3TB when I have the money to invest... (8x500GB drives in an external SATA array).
To reply to myself. Since I wrote this piece I did some research and found this VERY interesting article and basically sum up everything I had in mind:
I will just post the beginning of the article. A MUST READ:
So, a while back (August 2003), I wrote in my diary about a paradigm for system innovation that I wanted here. Then in October 2003, Intel announced its codename vanderpool project which got me excited to see it going in at the hardware level, which is where it should be IMNSHO, here.
Well, it's two years later, and Intel (and AMD's) "VT" virtualization technologies will be upon us in Q1/Q2 of 2006. I am so stoked, but it's the Apple + Intel pairing that gets me really excited, here's why:
First off I guess I should rewind for those who didn't read my old articles... and explain what "VT" is. VT is basically the current public name for Intel's Vanderpool and AMD's Pacifica technologies. It's a hardware level virtualization layer for x86/AMD64/emt64 processors. In essence this is like VMWare or VPC at the hardware level. Used in conjunction with Xen or VMware as a hypervisor most likely, you will be able to run several OS's straight from hardware simultaneously.
Now, to be fair, Xen & VMWare ESX server have offered this level of functionality for a while. But not without problems, Xen requires that you port your OS to Xen basically. Fine for Linux, but what about Windows? Forget it. What's worse is that Xen has been evolving essentially requiring reports, so even smaller projects (e.g. OpenBSD) with limited developers have been avoiding the porting effort because it has been a moving target. Meanwhile VMware seems to work well, but it costs a LOT (well VMWare is getting aggressive on developer pricing with a $300/year cart blanche license for all their products per developer but for non-production use), and moreover has strict hardware requirements so you can't just run it on any old PC, but have to make sure that it's something they support.
What is going to prevent tools like VMware or Xen running on Linux on this platform to run MacOSX, in addition to another virtual machine running Windows, especially if Intel's VT hardware virtualization is implemented on these machines?
After all, it is the purpose of Intel's VT platform. Both VMware and Xen (I know at least Xen support VT) will be able to run any other OS. So we could even imagine booting Windows natively on these machines running a VT enabled VMware MacOSX session...
Slashdot Mirror
I totally agree with the usefullness of disk storage... I have personally so many uses...
... 400... Once I work on them in photoshop I do like keeping the originals PSDs, which very often amounts to 500MB or more PER PHOTO. I try to usually limit to 500MB because of disk space and my computer/drive gets too slow. Image if each photo I work are 500MB. I could only store 2 of my originals per GB of space... Now imagine I want to store different revisions... I used to have a 250GB drive, mirrored. Got filled up very quickly.
I am a photographer. raw photos I take are easily 100MB. In a photoshoot i easily take 50 to
I don't care about music, but I am also into video editing and archiving. 12GB/hour is what my camera require for disk space.
Oh yes, I do have a mythtv box that I am currently building, I can't imagine how much diskspace I may want to this, and in total.
so yes. bring on disk space. I will never have enough and will always find a way to fill it up - LEGALLY. I am probably going to upgrade my 900GB file server (4x300GB, raid 5) i have at home and replace all the drives with 750GB. It is probably going to last me 6 months to a year?
but it is true that for most people there is no need for such amount of space. my parents have plenty of space... and they only have 80GB...
That is my assumption... I used to work for Register.com and we were having a HUGE number of parked domains and redirected domains served by Linux. Basically Microsoft approached us and offered us a pile of cash AND some of their engineers to help so we migrate the servers serving this (futurestep it was called if i remember right) to Windows and that they can use that as advertisement AND that netcraft would show a significant change in the number of sites hosted by Windows.... Let's say that it was very hard to refuse this...
So yeah... I would assume the same. How much money/services did they got from Microsoft?
My vision is a convergence of phone/data/tv and all communications channels/ways to data services. Phone companies will not matter anymore. Data companies will.
At the end, in a couple of years, or decade(s) all traditionnal phone lines will dissapear replaces with data-lines, high speed fibers directly to each home. 10G wireless networks will be capable of over 100mbps directly to any wireless devices. Secure IPv6 will be the norm so each device in the world can be uniquely identified.
There will be phone adapters so people can receive their phone conversations. They will be able to have those calls follow them wherever they are, from a handset to be transfered to a headset, bluetooth (or whatever technology they will be wearing), to the car communication system, to the desktop, back to the handset - without a hitch to the communication.
There will be video adapters so that people can start watching a show/movie from their either live tv or recorded, change room, take their pda or smart-phones, leave the room and continue watching the show, live. They will be able to take their portable entertainment center with them, keep on watching their shows in their cars on their ways to grandma. Arriving there, they will have access to their entire movie collection, photos, document, etc as if they were home. Where you are doesn't matter. You will have access to all your information. Even more futuristic but totally possible, all your data will be encrypted using your own DNA as the key so wherever you are access to your data IS guaranteed confidential.
Actual phone companies if they want to survive will have transform themselves from phone companies to data/services companies, providing multiple services, data, voice, video, tv, radio, etc... to their customers.
ah... I am a dreamer... but then... who knows? It may very well happen. The question is. When?
And wait another 10 years to get it??? Job security for those people yeah...
You mean, transforming your thighs in giant sausages?
I do not agree with that.
Let's say inventor A have the idea of a way of doing something. He patents it. Doesn't use it, and sit on it.
Inventor B a bit later, wants to do the same thing and OH, strange thing, think of the same way of doing it! A & B never talked to each other, and just saw a problem, found the same solution. 1+1=2 right? if I ask you what should I add to 1 to get to 2? how many answers?
Example:
- I think of the invention of a door with a handle. to open the door I have to push it so it gets out of my way. I patent that. but I never make a door.
- Someone else decide of making a door... and think, "how making I can make a door that can be pushed and it opens". how many ways is there of opening a door?
More than 2 people, not even smart, can come with the same idea about the same way of doing the same thing without concerting each other and even knowing about each other? It is ridiculous. Why should one be awarded a patent, and not the other?
Sorry, I am against THIS. Some ideas are obvious, if it is process, a software, a mathematical formula, something relatively obvious, it SHOULD NOT be patentable.
Let's see... My list would be:
- Small factor that I could carry with me in my pocket. Pants pocket preferred, but I could settle for belt or jacket.
- Cell phone with high speed wireless access (GPRS, EDGE, UMTS, etc...)
- Possibility to be ONLINE, connected AND one or more phone conversation simultaneously.
- VoIP client integrated to it.
- form factor with small keyboard for basic on the go work.
- OS should be easily upgradable
- sensitive screen so I can take notes on it with an integrated pen.
- Blue tooth, wifi, and all possible wireless technologies.
- Bluetooth should have all profiles enabled, file transfer, keyboard/mouse, headset, A2DP (bluetooth 2.0).
- Infrared receiver/emitter.
- Should be able to control it by voice as an option. Say Bluetooth headset with either a push-to-talk feature or automatic recognition. CONFIGURABLE.
- (mini )vga-port (wireless option?) so a full size screen can be connected.
- My favorite feature would be full wireless connectivity so when I arrive at my desk, my screen keyboards and all automatically connects to it and I could use it as my desktop.
- Automatic wireless backup on another computer whenever possible.
- Full encryption of content in case of loss.
- Security by either fingerprint/iris scan/etc...
- battery life of 10 hours when not plugged on power.
- Integrated GPS.
I think I am pretty much complete. Any more ideas? HP are you listening?
I wish I could work in a research center. I would have a lot of fun and ideas....
In theory it could be possible to encrypt them. But there are a few things to consider...
- My understanding is that vonage use SIP. SIP works over port 5060 usually. As long as traffic is seen on these ports it can be blocked no matter if encrypted or not.
- Encrypting the traffic would have 2 consequences:
-- adding a few milliseconds delay because of the encryption loop.
-- adding load on the servers, both your client (which in this case would be negligeable), but especially on the vonage servers. It would probably require some hardware upgrade and hardware encryption capabilities to make it acceptable
My recommendation would be, but it wouldn't be compliant with SIP anymore... To have a SIP connection negotiation doing the following: (maybe should make for another RFC...)
- SIP connections should be negotiated completely over SSL (or an encrypted layer as long as it works with both UDP and TCP regardless of the protocol)
- During those connections the ports numbers on both ends can be negotiated and choosen at 'random'. As they are encrypted carriers would have no ways of knowing them.
- The whole connection is encrypted.
- Ports can change and be renegotiated during the connection.
- Encryption keys can be changed and renegotiated during the connection.
- Provide different levels of encryption. Could adapt to network load: favorize security over encryption overhead, or the reverse.
I am pretty sure all of this could work very well if done properly.
If there could be an addentum to the SIP specs for this, that would be I think perfect. I know that if I were to design any VoIP protocol at this point, or P2P applications, etc... It would be my basis.
Well... sure... I agree with current infrastructure... But... If we could live in a dream world... There is still the experimental (for life??) multicast network... It was created to solve these problems. But it's been experimental for....... If companies were to push for it. It could work and solve all the problems.
Thoughts on this or am I wrong?
yes... maybe Yahoo doesn't like it because they have to pay royalties to Microsoft for the DRM technologies? Going unrestricted means:
;)
- no royalties for a DRM system to pay
- systems easier to implement
- customers more satisfied
- good for the image...
The don't own any DRM technology, and thus have no interest in such, adding some only frustrates customers and make them look bad. These days, they only want Google to look bad
I spent almost $9000 a few years ago an a HDTV compatible projector (a Sanyo PLV70). It has a DVI input, but oh wait. I can't even connect it to my HDTV receiver from Timewarner. It says it misses content protection thing. Right.... So I connect it using component. I do love the quality of the image, it is amazing. Even compared with today's projectors it does seem to do the job pretty well. Besides the fact that it is a rather big projector, but then it is hidden, I don't see ANY reason to change it. Except if one day I move to a smaller place, I would buy a Plasma TV.
I wish people like me had something they could do. All those protection mechanism systems are just insane. At the end they are useless and they only annoy people. The result of this? I will NOT be buying a HD-DVD player, unless I know it has been unlocked and support full resolution on the component... Everybody should do the same.
Why can't we, as an opensource community create a real completely decentralized p2p network? I have been thinking of doing this for a while and do have a lot of ideas for this. I have been online for 14 years and have seen a lot. After all we all know the problems with existing p2p networks from the past years:
- It has to be truly decentralized. No main server. Whatsoever. Except websites to download clients. It has to be able to discover new clients/networks/etc...
- Specs have to be open so anyone can implement a client.
- It has to be secured. Using SSL for example.
- It has to work from behind firewalls.
- It has to be secure enough to differentiate dups and fake files.
- Searches have to be decentralized, but cached, and verified for integrity.
- Of course, it has to be ad-free/spyware-free.
- It has to be built upon security, safety/integrity of the files and users in mind.
- Most of all, it has to be thought off as a legal project with legal uses so it can't be stopped.
I see no reason why this can't be implemented as a community effort? I have been a project manager for years, and for one would be willing to work/coordinate on such a project.
Aren't you scared to reboot it? I would be. Are you running any mission critical thing on it? I hope not, I wouldn't think you are if you did not know about the server?
Either way, a server with that uptime is a great testament for Unix stability but then, what would a windows machine do that would be unused for 5 years? Also... I would be scared to reboot this machine, hardware failure at reboot?
I get this kind of calls all the time, at least once or twice a week. Typical. I always ask when I can call them back and they always tell me that they share an office or something and they will call me back at my convenience.
Most of the time they are quite rude and pushy, to very pushy. In addition to the phone connection being horrible, such a lag and bad quality, it just doesn't look professional. If they were nice and agreable with a decent phone quality, maybe I would deal with them, a big MAYBE.
Hopefully someone with come back with a new ROM that will disable editing of the database and put a big ALL=ALLOW in it....
Then.... I have a general question... like I have, and I am sure a lot of people have, I have a 'modded' dvd player. It removes the macrovision signal and other goodies... Why can't we have some modded blueray players? Or HD-DVD players in the future?
Gigabit switches are pretty cheap these days. I rewired my home network, 7 machines with a gigabit switched network. I paid about $80 for a 8 ports gigabit.
My windows machines are loving accessing my file server on the network now! Though now it is getting time to buy a 16 ports switch and to upgrade the wireless network too. My 11b connection is getting too slow to work on the laptops...
I probably would have no need for a 100gigabit network at home... not yet... but I know some a company that were maxing out their gigabit link to internet. They just did an upgrade to 10 gigabit (2 links for redundancy of course)... and with the growth they are experiencing... 100gigabit wouldn't be out of the question for them in a few years...
Yes, one thing I don't understand.
The patents in questions are likely to be rejected. The whole object of this lawsuit are those patents.
How can the judge dismiss that? What if he awards the injunction, either forces to close or settle. One way or another. What will happen if/when the patents ARE rejected? Because the lawsuit would have been on invalid ground?
Why can't this new evidence taken into account for the lawsuit? I don't understand this law aberation. Why can't the judge either order to wait to know the result of the patent re-examination, or forces the PTO to re-examine faster and be a party in the lawsuit?
I just don't understand why this lawsuit is going on ground (patents) that are likely to be dismissed and deemed invalid. Because if I understand right, patents not valid = lawsuit not founded anymore.
Can someone explain?
Well, yes, for you, but there are some companies out there that are sending millions of legetimate emails a day...
I have interviewed for one some time ago. I am completely against spam, and do agree that their business is very legit. The only problem for them I can think of is that they send free daily newsletter to their customers. Their customers EXPECT these newsletters because they are on a very specific topic and are subscribed. From my understanding they are sending over a million emails to AOL addresses a day and growing... They are already on some whitelist from AOL which already complained of the amount of _legetimate_ email they send.
Now when you think about it. Those emails were signed-in BY the customers and are free. Who should pay? Should it be part of the customer's unlimited package? After all they have free 'unlimited' web surfing and all right? They are already paying for it part of their unlimited subscription package. Why should it be different?
In what is it different from Bellsouth requiring providers like google to pay for the traffic going to their end users??
It really depends on the headhunters. I have found 2 jobs so far with some and the experiences were different. I would think it depends on the market and the recruiter's interest. In one case the recruiter was hands-off and let me do the salary negotiation and everything. In the other case he said that I should not do that he will take care of it.
One thing I know, is that when they need you and they have a job for you, the really know how to call you... but once you've been rejected of that job for any reason, they tend to forget about you... Unless by a miracle they remember your name a few months later when another opportunity come up.
I also had my resume on Monster, Dice.com, hotjobs, etc... I was trying to apply directly with the companies, but I would say that recruiters got me 90% of the interviews I have been. Though I do find it easier sometime when you can do it without them. I have had a job that slipped out because the company found another candidate by himself, and although he liked me very much he said he choose to not pay the 25% agency fee... It can get expensive for some smaller companies especially on 6 digits salaries.
It would be a never ending situation if they were to start paying.
If they start paying for one ISP. What would prevent another one for asking for fees? and another one? and another one? Everyone could ask for their share. It would hurt google, or any other content companies badly... and the consumers by association. ME!
That is a great news...
Take the example of a random company, let's say... Linksys, a publicaly traded company, owned by Cisco.
They release an appliance with Linux in it... They don't release the source code. It is GPL. They are in violation of Sarbannes Oxley. It's a big deal if this is discovered, could put them into trouble. It is probably the best way to force a company to comply with the GPL.
Now it is too bad it only applies to publicaly traded companies...
There is never enough space... I guess I am one of those people. I only want top quality.
.psd that the photo is between 300 to 600MB when you add the layers and etc... Considering that when I do a photoshoot I might have 10 to 20 images I will rework on.... It takes up a lot of space.
Unfortunately for me, I am in videographer, as well as a photographer, and a video collector.
When I work on photoshop on some photos. I always work from the original 16MP, 16bits photos from my camera, right there it is already 96MB. It isn't rare that when I save it in
Then on the other end, I also do video editing. From mini-dv, it is about 12GB/hour. You can also fill up a harddrive very quickly with this. And it is not even the new hires cam you can get.
I also used to like putting all my DVDs, uncompressed on my computer so I could have the best quality video/audio watching them on my projector.
so see... i have 2TB of storage at home, and it is full... Backup is an headache. I can't wait to add another 3TB when I have the money to invest... (8x500GB drives in an external SATA array).
To reply to myself. Since I wrote this piece I did some research and found this VERY interesting article and basically sum up everything I had in mind:
I will just post the beginning of the article. A MUST READ:
http://www.advogato.org/article/860.html
So, a while back (August 2003), I wrote in my diary about a paradigm for system innovation that I wanted here. Then in October 2003, Intel announced its codename vanderpool project which got me excited to see it going in at the hardware level, which is where it should be IMNSHO, here.
Well, it's two years later, and Intel (and AMD's) "VT" virtualization technologies will be upon us in Q1/Q2 of 2006. I am so stoked, but it's the Apple + Intel pairing that gets me really excited, here's why:
First off I guess I should rewind for those who didn't read my old articles... and explain what "VT" is. VT is basically the current public name for Intel's Vanderpool and AMD's Pacifica technologies. It's a hardware level virtualization layer for x86/AMD64/emt64 processors. In essence this is like VMWare or VPC at the hardware level. Used in conjunction with Xen or VMware as a hypervisor most likely, you will be able to run several OS's straight from hardware simultaneously.
Now, to be fair, Xen & VMWare ESX server have offered this level of functionality for a while. But not without problems, Xen requires that you port your OS to Xen basically. Fine for Linux, but what about Windows? Forget it. What's worse is that Xen has been evolving essentially requiring reports, so even smaller projects (e.g. OpenBSD) with limited developers have been avoiding the porting effort because it has been a moving target. Meanwhile VMware seems to work well, but it costs a LOT (well VMWare is getting aggressive on developer pricing with a $300/year cart blanche license for all their products per developer but for non-production use), and moreover has strict hardware requirements so you can't just run it on any old PC, but have to make sure that it's something they support.
-----------------------
For the full article: http://www.advogato.org/article/860.html
I have the reverse question...
Now that MaxOSX is going to work on intel...
What is going to prevent tools like VMware or Xen running on Linux on this platform to run MacOSX, in addition to another virtual machine running Windows, especially if Intel's VT hardware virtualization is implemented on these machines?
After all, it is the purpose of Intel's VT platform. Both VMware and Xen (I know at least Xen support VT) will be able to run any other OS. So we could even imagine booting Windows natively on these machines running a VT enabled VMware MacOSX session...
It is going to be interesting...