To be honest, the person who wrote the response probably doesn't have a clue that this is BS.
In fact, their lawyers probably make them state this even if it isn't true just to cover their butts from a lawsuit. And the lawyers are probably correct to do so since for the price of a few extra micrograms of ink they can insulate themselves from yet another silly lawsuit.
I kinda like it, could be done a bit better in places, but not bad at all. Sure looks better than having all of those systems on a shelf with cables and whatnot everywhere.
It could use:
* grabhandles on the top
* wheels
* a projector in the back
* a generator
Once you have those mods, it's time to go camping and see what happens when people see you playing games on a 60' rock embankment.
You miss the point... the manufacturers can qualify their equipment with very powerful antennas. I don't believe they have to -sell- those more powerful antennas. So Linksys could qualify a WRT54G rev3 with a different, more powerful, antenna but continue selling with the wimpy ones they have. Then if I want to go to Radio Shack and pick up the more powerful antennas for $20, I can do so so long as they are equal or less than the power of the -qualified- antennas.
Of course, this probably means companies will start doing things to make their connectors hard to match so you have to buy a name-brand antenna rather than a BNC connector antenna from Radio Shack (alot of products already do this).
So for instance at my house I'm breakin da law by having a directional high gain antenna connected to an 802.11b bridge so that I can do things like post to/. over a high speed link to my ISP. In the future, if the bridge manufacturer certified an antenna of equal or -higher- strength, I could keep using my antenna without breaking the law. That doesn't mean that they are going to sell that $120 bridge with a $100 antenna... only that they qualify it.
Actually, even if SCO's stock -hadn't- gone back up, they had approximately the same delta as SUNW did today, and SUNW had posted a $795 profit today.
Between profit taking (SUNW) and artificial price propping (SCO big buys) there is no logical (as in IANAEconomist) accounting for stock market prices.
Yep... bad analogies rule when/. articles try to drive a point home.
For the Focus analogy to work Ford would have to not only sell you the car, but also the gasoline (power/network) -and- license rights to your car's technology to any locations that you want to visit (games).
At that point they would put license terms on the car stating that by using the car you agree to only use their gas and stop at their locations.
And you can -bet- that if you developed a part that allowed you to use Chevy's gas or Jeep's locations of choice (I want a Ford Focus that lets me climb a Jeep trail!) that Ford would be working their asses off to get your new part declared illegal.
Now I have my doubts that the courts / legislators would allow this (since at least some of THEM own Chevys or Jeeps or some other brand) but that brings us to the other places where the analogy fails:
1) It is hard as hell to find a legislator or jurist that doesn't own some form of vehicle, but I have my doubts they own a game console much less give a rat's behind about people who want to run games from across the ocean and/or (in the case of an Xbox) turn it into a media center... and they certainly are not going to publicly identify with fair use copying or the seedier things that a mod chip enables.
2) Cars are essential parts of daily life... people need them to get to work. People need them to rush to the doctor. Etc, etc, etc. Therefore the government can not allow the car makers to have control over all aspects of the car as it is not in the best interests of others. Gaming consoles on the other hand share none of those traits.
3) Cars are specifically built to have parts replaced and you buy your car knowing that. Consoles are specifically built to NOT have parts replaced (otherwise they would have computer-like access to those parts). You buy the console with this knowledge aforethought.
And before someone comes to the mistaken conclusion that I am against modifications of hardware, I'm not (though I am against piracy of games). But the analogy fails miserably and I think it is important that people look at the way the "other side" is seeing things if for no other reason that to strengthen their own arguments.
Does this mean that one can build a paraplane with a larger fuel tank and/or an essentially ultralight with 2 seats and fly it with the sport pilot license?
I think that the ultralight category limited fuel tank capacity and only allowed one seat.
If the new class eases those restrictions a bit they make those vehicles MUCH more practical.
Agreed, but since you can't moderate -and- post on the same thread, my feeling is that I would rather see what you think than see a moderation and have to guess at it. If you have nothing in mind when moderating, go for it, I'm just expressing my desire to have a thoughtful conversation with no mod up (or down:) than to see a score:5 (or score:-1:) that goes nowhere.
And definitely off-topic... I've got a bit in my journal on my.sig...
If by 4) you mean your post, you should probably have asked that of yourself before posting. If by 4) you mean the article... heck yes. "News for Nerds". No one (who is in charge) said/. was all about Linux or the 'net. I think using plants as speakers is techno-gadget nerderific... don't you?
That's your fault for not implementing a checking algorithm when the users are changing their passwords.
We had a password checker for our users (when I was at an ISP) that prevented stupid user dictionary attacks back in 1994/1995. A little user hassle at that bottleneck prevents a world of hurt later on.
Yes, the AMD64 chips can run 32bit code even when the kernel is 64bit. But to run an app in 64bit mode you must have 64bit compiled libraries.
Example... 64bit kernel wants to run 32bit XFree86 binaries... it must use 32bit versions of all the Xfree libraries. On the other hand, 64bit kernel wants to run 64bit Xfree86 binaries... the XFree libraries must be compiled for 64bit usage.
Therefore you have to have 64bit libraries and 32bit libraries. You can't run a 32bit application with the 64bit libraries and you most definitely can't run 64bit applications with 32bit libraries.
The 64bit kernel in all the above cases would still be a 64bit kernel, but there are app dependencies.
IIRC, JFS was contributed by IBM. Go back to the IBM v. SCO mess. I would guess that some part of the JFS code (at least in SCO's mind) contains SCO licensed material.
Remember that just because IBM wrote most of JFS, it may still contain code that had to be duplicated or rewritten to work outside of AIX. The question is whether IBM violated their agreements with SCO by redistributing or re-engineering those technologies.
Not saying it is so, only pointing out what SCO is probably trying to say
Re:A brief and redundant article
on
IPv6 is Here
·
· Score: 1
No, really?
My point was that saying "www2", etc out of context do not canonically prove that they are hostnames.
I didn't say his post was blatantly invalid, only that it wasn't specific enough to always be true.
Remember those wonderful "true or false, if some mammals are people, and all slashdot readers are people, then all mammals read slashdot" exercises? This was one of those.
I'll post anonymously just so I don't get flamed... yes, I work at Sun... blah:)
A SunRay server + terminals would seem ideal here. Pop your smartcard in, log in once in the morning, pull the card out and walk away. Need to enter something? Walk to an available terminal anywhere on the same network and pop your card in again. Your session appears. Rinse, wash, repeat. No keyboard input except during the login.
If you have enough memory you can just keep the sessions running indefinitely. I would highly recommend the client software be set to auto-save data every X minutes in case of the rare need to reboot. Or you could kill sessions every X hours (1, 4, 8, 12, 24, whatever) of inactivity.
So far I have yet to see a system do this kind of thing better than SunRay terminals, but there are most definitely similar solutions out there. Whatever fits best, go for it... but having a session stay loaded with smartcard auth would definitely be the quickest method of allowing nomadic data entry.
There has also been work done (I believe by Tadpole and others) to create wireless 802.11b SunRay terminals, which opens up another realm of portability.
I can't get *DSL capabilities from Qwest or Cable modems where I live... and Verizon isn't anywhere near my area... I would guess that for most people FTTP is WAY far out in the future, if it happens at all.
I'd definitely pay for it... hell I'd double that... but I don't presume to see it.
Re:Personally, I would go one step further.
on
Game with God
·
· Score: 1
When a high-ranking member of the Roman Catholic Church (I wish I had gotten the name, but it was a blurb on an HBO program about Celibacy that I had running in the background yesterday) states that the current Priests-as-abusers scandle is going to shake out the Church like a "second Galileo"... I think it shows that Galileo can be used to describe -bad- aspects of Catholicism/Christianity as easily as it can be used to show that an intelligent person can be a devout follower.
From what I have read, Galileo was a firm believer in God and the Trinity... but was pretty well disgusted at how the Church forced him to renounce his scientific discoveries.
And even intelligent people can make ridiculous stances in the name of their religion (not saying Galileo did, he was forced to renounce his discoveries, I'm thinking more of the state board of education in my birth state of Kansas a couple of years ago).
As a server supplier, you shouldn't be dealing with training/supporting the web browser client side at all, unless the customer is paying for training services.
We diverged discussions, I was speaking about the helpdesk / support tech / admin / whoever who is employed on-site or at least on-demand for the company looking at an alternative browser.
I've worked support, too. Spend an extra minute or two with the user to explain -why- the function works that way or hold a training some afternoon where all can be present.
90% will get it if you take the time to teach them how -and- why rather than just saying "right-click here, blah blah blah" and leave.
I never said it was a perfect solution, but no solution will work if you go into assuming that your supported base is stupid.
You don't pay for a Yahoo, AIM or ICQ address. Very different model. Especially when you pay to receive messages on those phones.
If you could get free SMS reception (and yes, you pay for it, even if it is $4.99/month for unlimited) by signing up with each of the major carriers for a free account and then run a low-impact server somewhere to translate between the networks, would you? Alot of the more geekly folk here would.
There are a lot of Holy Grails out there apparently. This one seems to be pretty low on the list.
You -can- do that, install Firefox with the "view in IE" extension. Train them to only launch Firefox. Tell them if the site doesn't work (maybe wait for a call to the helpdesk) to use the extension to launch IE. Remind them to close IE when done.
About the only thing left to be done would be integration of IE bookmarks... having Firefox dynamically inject the IE bookmarks in a "view in IE" virtual bookmark folder, which when selected would launch an IE window.
When enough people start doing this you will start seeing cross-platform sites again (web developers sure got lazy in the time since that was my occupation). Sure, the true Firefox usage numbers will be dilluted (1 hit with Firefox then a bunch of hits with IE from the same address could be data mined fairly accurately though), but even 10% of users using an unsupported browser will be enough to start the ball rolling.
Slashdot Mirror
To be honest, the person who wrote the response probably doesn't have a clue that this is BS.
In fact, their lawyers probably make them state this even if it isn't true just to cover their butts from a lawsuit. And the lawyers are probably correct to do so since for the price of a few extra micrograms of ink they can insulate themselves from yet another silly lawsuit.
So BS, yes, but in the end not Nintendo's fault.
I kinda like it, could be done a bit better in places, but not bad at all. Sure looks better than having all of those systems on a shelf with cables and whatnot everywhere.
It could use:
* grabhandles on the top
* wheels
* a projector in the back
* a generator
Once you have those mods, it's time to go camping and see what happens when people see you playing games on a 60' rock embankment.
Oh yeah.
You miss the point ... the manufacturers can qualify their equipment with very powerful antennas. I don't believe they have to -sell- those more powerful antennas. So Linksys could qualify a WRT54G rev3 with a different, more powerful, antenna but continue selling with the wimpy ones they have. Then if I want to go to Radio Shack and pick up the more powerful antennas for $20, I can do so so long as they are equal or less than the power of the -qualified- antennas.
/. over a high speed link to my ISP. In the future, if the bridge manufacturer certified an antenna of equal or -higher- strength, I could keep using my antenna without breaking the law. That doesn't mean that they are going to sell that $120 bridge with a $100 antenna ... only that they qualify it.
Of course, this probably means companies will start doing things to make their connectors hard to match so you have to buy a name-brand antenna rather than a BNC connector antenna from Radio Shack (alot of products already do this).
So for instance at my house I'm breakin da law by having a directional high gain antenna connected to an 802.11b bridge so that I can do things like post to
Jeff Foxworthy: "Do you know what happens when a Redneck experiences Schadenfreude?"
(see parent of this post)
Actually, even if SCO's stock -hadn't- gone back up, they had approximately the same delta as SUNW did today, and SUNW had posted a $795 profit today.
Between profit taking (SUNW) and artificial price propping (SCO big buys) there is no logical (as in IANAEconomist) accounting for stock market prices.
Yep ... bad analogies rule when /. articles try to drive a point home.
... and they certainly are not going to publicly identify with fair use copying or the seedier things that a mod chip enables.
... people need them to get to work. People need them to rush to the doctor. Etc, etc, etc. Therefore the government can not allow the car makers to have control over all aspects of the car as it is not in the best interests of others. Gaming consoles on the other hand share none of those traits.
For the Focus analogy to work Ford would have to not only sell you the car, but also the gasoline (power/network) -and- license rights to your car's technology to any locations that you want to visit (games).
At that point they would put license terms on the car stating that by using the car you agree to only use their gas and stop at their locations.
And you can -bet- that if you developed a part that allowed you to use Chevy's gas or Jeep's locations of choice (I want a Ford Focus that lets me climb a Jeep trail!) that Ford would be working their asses off to get your new part declared illegal.
Now I have my doubts that the courts / legislators would allow this (since at least some of THEM own Chevys or Jeeps or some other brand) but that brings us to the other places where the analogy fails:
1) It is hard as hell to find a legislator or jurist that doesn't own some form of vehicle, but I have my doubts they own a game console much less give a rat's behind about people who want to run games from across the ocean and/or (in the case of an Xbox) turn it into a media center
2) Cars are essential parts of daily life
3) Cars are specifically built to have parts replaced and you buy your car knowing that. Consoles are specifically built to NOT have parts replaced (otherwise they would have computer-like access to those parts). You buy the console with this knowledge aforethought.
And before someone comes to the mistaken conclusion that I am against modifications of hardware, I'm not (though I am against piracy of games). But the analogy fails miserably and I think it is important that people look at the way the "other side" is seeing things if for no other reason that to strengthen their own arguments.
Does this mean that one can build a paraplane with a larger fuel tank and/or an essentially ultralight with 2 seats and fly it with the sport pilot license?
I think that the ultralight category limited fuel tank capacity and only allowed one seat.
If the new class eases those restrictions a bit they make those vehicles MUCH more practical.
I believe you mean pwnt.
Agreed, but since you can't moderate -and- post on the same thread, my feeling is that I would rather see what you think than see a moderation and have to guess at it. If you have nothing in mind when moderating, go for it, I'm just expressing my desire to have a thoughtful conversation with no mod up (or down :) than to see a score:5 (or score:-1 :) that goes nowhere.
... I've got a bit in my journal on my .sig ...
And definitely off-topic
If by 4) you mean your post, you should probably have asked that of yourself before posting. If by 4) you mean the article ... heck yes. "News for Nerds". No one (who is in charge) said /. was all about Linux or the 'net. I think using plants as speakers is techno-gadget nerderific ... don't you?
That's your fault for not implementing a checking algorithm when the users are changing their passwords.
We had a password checker for our users (when I was at an ISP) that prevented stupid user dictionary attacks back in 1994/1995. A little user hassle at that bottleneck prevents a world of hurt later on.
Yes and no.
... 64bit kernel wants to run 32bit XFree86 binaries ... it must use 32bit versions of all the Xfree libraries. On the other hand, 64bit kernel wants to run 64bit Xfree86 binaries ... the XFree libraries must be compiled for 64bit usage.
Yes, the AMD64 chips can run 32bit code even when the kernel is 64bit. But to run an app in 64bit mode you must have 64bit compiled libraries.
Example
Therefore you have to have 64bit libraries and 32bit libraries. You can't run a 32bit application with the 64bit libraries and you most definitely can't run 64bit applications with 32bit libraries.
The 64bit kernel in all the above cases would still be a 64bit kernel, but there are app dependencies.
IIRC, JFS was contributed by IBM. Go back to the IBM v. SCO mess. I would guess that some part of the JFS code (at least in SCO's mind) contains SCO licensed material.
Remember that just because IBM wrote most of JFS, it may still contain code that had to be duplicated or rewritten to work outside of AIX. The question is whether IBM violated their agreements with SCO by redistributing or re-engineering those technologies.
Not saying it is so, only pointing out what SCO is probably trying to say
No, really?
My point was that saying "www2", etc out of context do not canonically prove that they are hostnames.
I didn't say his post was blatantly invalid, only that it wasn't specific enough to always be true.
Remember those wonderful "true or false, if some mammals are people, and all slashdot readers are people, then all mammals read slashdot" exercises? This was one of those.
Welcome to 1992.
Actually:
... I'm sure others are too. While I get the spirit of your post, it is not necessarily accurate.
www.com
and
www2.com
both are valid domain names
Just in time for my retirement party ... yippee!
I'll post anonymously just so I don't get flamed ... yes, I work at Sun ... blah :)
... but having a session stay loaded with smartcard auth would definitely be the quickest method of allowing nomadic data entry.
A SunRay server + terminals would seem ideal here. Pop your smartcard in, log in once in the morning, pull the card out and walk away. Need to enter something? Walk to an available terminal anywhere on the same network and pop your card in again. Your session appears. Rinse, wash, repeat. No keyboard input except during the login.
If you have enough memory you can just keep the sessions running indefinitely. I would highly recommend the client software be set to auto-save data every X minutes in case of the rare need to reboot. Or you could kill sessions every X hours (1, 4, 8, 12, 24, whatever) of inactivity.
So far I have yet to see a system do this kind of thing better than SunRay terminals, but there are most definitely similar solutions out there. Whatever fits best, go for it
There has also been work done (I believe by Tadpole and others) to create wireless 802.11b SunRay terminals, which opens up another realm of portability.
I can't get *DSL capabilities from Qwest or Cable modems where I live ... and Verizon isn't anywhere near my area ... I would guess that for most people FTTP is WAY far out in the future, if it happens at all.
... hell I'd double that ... but I don't presume to see it.
I'd definitely pay for it
When a high-ranking member of the Roman Catholic Church (I wish I had gotten the name, but it was a blurb on an HBO program about Celibacy that I had running in the background yesterday) states that the current Priests-as-abusers scandle is going to shake out the Church like a "second Galileo" ... I think it shows that Galileo can be used to describe -bad- aspects of Catholicism/Christianity as easily as it can be used to show that an intelligent person can be a devout follower.
... but was pretty well disgusted at how the Church forced him to renounce his scientific discoveries.
From what I have read, Galileo was a firm believer in God and the Trinity
And even intelligent people can make ridiculous stances in the name of their religion (not saying Galileo did, he was forced to renounce his discoveries, I'm thinking more of the state board of education in my birth state of Kansas a couple of years ago).
No kidding ... I've been using Gmail for a couple of weeks and until you mentioned it I had forgotten that it even HAD ads.
As a server supplier, you shouldn't be dealing with training/supporting the web browser client side at all, unless the customer is paying for training services.
We diverged discussions, I was speaking about the helpdesk / support tech / admin / whoever who is employed on-site or at least on-demand for the company looking at an alternative browser.
I've worked support, too. Spend an extra minute or two with the user to explain -why- the function works that way or hold a training some afternoon where all can be present.
90% will get it if you take the time to teach them how -and- why rather than just saying "right-click here, blah blah blah" and leave.
I never said it was a perfect solution, but no solution will work if you go into assuming that your supported base is stupid.
You don't pay for a Yahoo, AIM or ICQ address. Very different model. Especially when you pay to receive messages on those phones.
If you could get free SMS reception (and yes, you pay for it, even if it is $4.99/month for unlimited) by signing up with each of the major carriers for a free account and then run a low-impact server somewhere to translate between the networks, would you? Alot of the more geekly folk here would.
There are a lot of Holy Grails out there apparently. This one seems to be pretty low on the list.
You -can- do that, install Firefox with the "view in IE" extension. Train them to only launch Firefox. Tell them if the site doesn't work (maybe wait for a call to the helpdesk) to use the extension to launch IE. Remind them to close IE when done.
... having Firefox dynamically inject the IE bookmarks in a "view in IE" virtual bookmark folder, which when selected would launch an IE window.
About the only thing left to be done would be integration of IE bookmarks
When enough people start doing this you will start seeing cross-platform sites again (web developers sure got lazy in the time since that was my occupation). Sure, the true Firefox usage numbers will be dilluted (1 hit with Firefox then a bunch of hits with IE from the same address could be data mined fairly accurately though), but even 10% of users using an unsupported browser will be enough to start the ball rolling.