I think this case hinges on the 25% issue... the fact that he was "off-site" for 75% of his time isn't relevant (in the same way a salesman might be off-site for long periods of time).
My guess is that he lost the case (and the Supremes chose not to hear it) because he was physically present in New York (at least partially) and thus was a local employee collecting a local salary, whatever his other arrangements might have been.
I would also guess that someone who telecommuted 100% of the time would not face the same issue.
FYI: rich people hire lawyers and accountants to make sure they pay the least amount of taxes possible. They also often setup non-profit trusts and such to shelter much of their money.
Not to mention that the really, really rich (like >1 million in investments) generate their money via capital gains which is an entirely different issue.
So while the "nominal" rate in some of these systems (fair tax, sales tax, etc) may appear to decrease we must realize that the really rich aren't paying the so-called nominal rate in the first place.
This is not transparent aluminum... it is just another transparent aluminum oxide. We've been through this before with transparent alumina (another oxide of aluminum).
Microsoft is virtualizing the display hardware in the same way memory was virtualized long ago. In the Longhorn world programs have graphics timeslices and schedule graphics rendering similar to the way threads share the CPU.
Obviously this model is a huge departure from anything currently known and this requires the entire graphics stack be rethought. Part of that rethinking is that Direct3D (and the 3d accelerator hardware) will be doing the heavy lifting. This means you have two choices for OpenGL: force it to play nice with the virtualization just like everything else (in which case you get a performance hit) or run the app full-screen where the ICD can monopolize the hardware just like most things deal with it today.
Any just like in the past hardware will continue to get faster (and better at virtualizing specifically) to the point where we just accept the virtualization without question and happily pay the overhead cost. (After all running a single program directly without OS VMM and scheduling overhead is faster!)
This is a political "save our own asses" discision by the ESRB. They want to avoid any potential shitstorms so they are going to blame Rockstar for the whole affair to look like they are taking it seriously.
Meanwhile, the majority of the USA doesn't give two shits.
I know its funny to bash Windows uptime around here but our Superdome running Windows Datacenter 64-bit hasn't had any unscheduled downtime since it was installed over a year ago.
My XP development workstation only ever reboots for patches - at times I go months without rebooting or even logging off.
It has very little to do with programmers "not being used to it".
Many problems require the result of operation X to complete operation Y; in other words the algorithms are naturally serial in nature and are not easily amenable to parallelism.
There are a few clever tricks but in some cases making a serial operation parallel gives vastly decreasing performance gains (i.e. two threads = 110% of one thread, four threads = 105% of two threads, etc).
If the lawsuit had 10 people working on it (lawyers, paras, runners/office workers, etc) and they worked for two years then that's ~2 million in salaries after you factor in benefits and so forth. Add in 700,000 of expenses (plane trips, hotels, etc) and the figure isn't totally baseless.
Most of those useless keyword, domain parking/hijacking, and spam sites out there run on Linux+Apache because the owner can host thousands of those domains fairly inexpensively, and that's the key to all spam: minimization of operating expenses so you only need 1 out of 100,000 users to click/buy to turn a profit.
These sites don't have any real content, they just point to other sites and/or exist to spam you with advertisements. Some of them have googlebombed their way higher into the rankings.
My guess is that MSN does a slightly better job of filtering those useless sites out of the index at the present time, OR the "googlebombing" techniques they use aren't as effective with MSN's indexing. Since they almost exclusively use Apache that would have the false appearance of favoring IIS.
There is a simple solution for Google: Only honor 302 redirects when the original and target domains match (or points to a subdomain of the original domain.)
In all other cases treat a 302 (temporary) as a 301 (permanent) redirect, thus giving credit for the content to the actual hoster of the content.
This allows webmasters to continue using 302s to setup logical URLs to mask the organization of underlying content but eliminates the ability to hijack completely.
recently migrated to.NET. The server admin seems happy but the user experience sucks big time. I never thought I would say something nice about Cold Fusion but the forum certainly was more user friendly running under that.
What the hell does this have to do with anything? That's a software development issue, not a platform issue.
There are many web discussion forums out there that run on dotnet. I'm sure you could find one that better suits your needs. None of this has anything to do with dotnet as a platform and your comment is therefore offtopic.
The most probable reason for this might be code portability. If you force yourself to write code on a PPC machine then the odds are much better that you'll end up with portable code (as you already know a bazillion x86 users will be testing your code anyway.)
Microsoft did something similar with Windows NT: The x86 version was only first compiled much later in the development process. The devs all used PPC, MIPS, or Alpha machines to do their development work.
VB.NET originally supported this (different access on setter and getter) but since C# didn't support it they dropped it to be compatible... now that C# is gonna support it in the next version they are going back in and re-enabling the feature.
Why it wasn't in originally I don't know, it would seem to be an obvious feature.
He says, among other things that software patents are a "bad idea" and that he did not "feel particularly proud of my involvement in the patent process in this case".
Any IT shop with more than 10 Windows boxes that isn't running SUS (or an equivalent 3rd party product) is guilty of dereliction of duty.
SUS is free, easy to setup, and gives you complete control of which updates roll out, how often, etc. (It can be setup to automatically roll all updates out daily of course).
Besides, SP2 is a good thing in terms of security.
Actually the NRC has recently approved new construction permits; the US for the first time in a long time will begin constructing new nuke plants.
In some ways this has turned out well for us because we are jumping straight from Generation 1 to Generation 3/4 power plants, which are safer, produce less waste, and are cheaper to run.
Like we really need more Rhetoric from Sun... but I'll deal with his concerns anyway.
In order to use "unsafe" code from managed C++ (or unsafe blocks in C#) you must have "FullTrust" security rights, otherwise the code fails to run.
You could shoot yourself in the foot but the runtime is perfectly capable of detecting and coping with corruption of the managed heap (generally by closing down the offending AppDomain.) Of course you can write a COM component in C++ and call it from dotnet, which is (in effect) the same exact thing! (I dare you to try and stop me from trashing Java or dotnet once I'm loaded in process via JNI or COM...)
CAS (Code Access Security) means that no other code can call your "unsafe" methods without FullTrust either, so there is no danger from code running off the web of doing this.
JNI is the same thing, Sun just gets to hide behind the lie since the risks aren't known by or integrated with the platform. At least with unsafe code the runtime is fully aware of that pointer voodoo magic you are trying to pull and can deal with it appropriately.
In other words Game Developer X can hand-tune the rendering algorithm inside the "unsafe" code areas, but develop the rest of the platform in fully managed code, making the development process much easier to write, test, and debug.
(As an aside, thanks to the antitrust ruling Microsoft is not allowed to comment on a great many things, including competitors. I don't know if this falls under that heading, but in many cases Microsoft's employees can't just come out and call bullshit when they see it for legal reasons.)
1. Temporal Cold War. The dumbest idea ever. Just because we are doing a Star Trek show set in the past (relatively) doesn't mean we need to create an artificial plot device to drag the future into it.
2. T'Pol having sex. As much as she is a hottie, what is the point of having a Vulcan on board who doesn't act like one?
After the 15th temporal cold war episode where T'Pol is falling in love with whats-his-face I just turned it off and never watched another episode again.
progman.exe in Windows XP is just a stub to intercept DDE calls and process launches for Explorer, typically for older Windows 3.x programs that were written to depend upon its presence.
The number of appcompat hacks, workarounds, et al is really very staggering. Linus has the benefit of just changing something and telling everyone to fuck off when their stuff breaks. Microsoft has paying customers that don't take kindly to the same sort of treatment.
It appears you don't have your facts straight either.
NASA didn't catch the error because Alenia Spazio refused to share details since they saw JPL as competitors; NASA was never allowed to see the receiver design. They assumed the Italians were smart enough to compensate for the effect on their own, which proved not to be the case.
He most likely signs that way to fill in the signature line completely, sorta like drawing a long line on a paper check to fully take up the "amount" field.
Why that would be necessary I dont know, but there you have it.
Just for comparison Windows XP/2003 use a parallel boot process (along with preloading based on previous boot history). All services (daemons) have dependency lists and services are started as soon as their dependencies are met and run in parallel.
IIRC the biggest speedup came from kicking off the network subsystem asyncronously very early in the process so everything wasn't waiting on DHCP, et al.
My workstation here at work boots in about 15 seconds flat to the login prompt. My home system takes a lot longer because SCSI RAID cards take forever to initialize (as some of you know.)
Anyway like I said: this post just for comparison. I still think BeOS holds the world record for boot speed.
Slashdot Mirror
I think this case hinges on the 25% issue... the fact that he was "off-site" for 75% of his time isn't relevant (in the same way a salesman might be off-site for long periods of time).
My guess is that he lost the case (and the Supremes chose not to hear it) because he was physically present in New York (at least partially) and thus was a local employee collecting a local salary, whatever his other arrangements might have been.
I would also guess that someone who telecommuted 100% of the time would not face the same issue.
FYI: rich people hire lawyers and accountants to make sure they pay the least amount of taxes possible. They also often setup non-profit trusts and such to shelter much of their money.
Not to mention that the really, really rich (like >1 million in investments) generate their money via capital gains which is an entirely different issue.
So while the "nominal" rate in some of these systems (fair tax, sales tax, etc) may appear to decrease we must realize that the really rich aren't paying the so-called nominal rate in the first place.
This is not transparent aluminum... it is just another transparent aluminum oxide. We've been through this before with transparent alumina (another oxide of aluminum).
Microsoft is virtualizing the display hardware in the same way memory was virtualized long ago. In the Longhorn world programs have graphics timeslices and schedule graphics rendering similar to the way threads share the CPU.
Obviously this model is a huge departure from anything currently known and this requires the entire graphics stack be rethought. Part of that rethinking is that Direct3D (and the 3d accelerator hardware) will be doing the heavy lifting. This means you have two choices for OpenGL: force it to play nice with the virtualization just like everything else (in which case you get a performance hit) or run the app full-screen where the ICD can monopolize the hardware just like most things deal with it today.
Any just like in the past hardware will continue to get faster (and better at virtualizing specifically) to the point where we just accept the virtualization without question and happily pay the overhead cost. (After all running a single program directly without OS VMM and scheduling overhead is faster!)
This is a political "save our own asses" discision by the ESRB. They want to avoid any potential shitstorms so they are going to blame Rockstar for the whole affair to look like they are taking it seriously.
Meanwhile, the majority of the USA doesn't give two shits.
I know its funny to bash Windows uptime around here but our Superdome running Windows Datacenter 64-bit hasn't had any unscheduled downtime since it was installed over a year ago.
My XP development workstation only ever reboots for patches - at times I go months without rebooting or even logging off.
Just thought I'd share.
The whole point of the way internet routing works is to allow traffic to route across alternate links when the "best" link goes down.
Having a single pipe feeding an entire country is pretty damn stupid.
It has very little to do with programmers "not being used to it".
Many problems require the result of operation X to complete operation Y; in other words the algorithms are naturally serial in nature and are not easily amenable to parallelism.
There are a few clever tricks but in some cases making a serial operation parallel gives vastly decreasing performance gains (i.e. two threads = 110% of one thread, four threads = 105% of two threads, etc).
You are quite correct.
If the lawsuit had 10 people working on it (lawyers, paras, runners/office workers, etc) and they worked for two years then that's ~2 million in salaries after you factor in benefits and so forth. Add in 700,000 of expenses (plane trips, hotels, etc) and the figure isn't totally baseless.
Most of those useless keyword, domain parking/hijacking, and spam sites out there run on Linux+Apache because the owner can host thousands of those domains fairly inexpensively, and that's the key to all spam: minimization of operating expenses so you only need 1 out of 100,000 users to click/buy to turn a profit.
These sites don't have any real content, they just point to other sites and/or exist to spam you with advertisements. Some of them have googlebombed their way higher into the rankings.
My guess is that MSN does a slightly better job of filtering those useless sites out of the index at the present time, OR the "googlebombing" techniques they use aren't as effective with MSN's indexing. Since they almost exclusively use Apache that would have the false appearance of favoring IIS.
This is just a guess, but it seems plausable.
There is a simple solution for Google: Only honor 302 redirects when the original and target domains match (or points to a subdomain of the original domain.)
In all other cases treat a 302 (temporary) as a 301 (permanent) redirect, thus giving credit for the content to the actual hoster of the content.
This allows webmasters to continue using 302s to setup logical URLs to mask the organization of underlying content but eliminates the ability to hijack completely.
My guess is that IE7 is just an update to the existing codebase and not a planned C# rewrite/upgrade (which one would presume might be IE8).
What the hell does this have to do with anything? That's a software development issue, not a platform issue.
There are many web discussion forums out there that run on dotnet. I'm sure you could find one that better suits your needs. None of this has anything to do with dotnet as a platform and your comment is therefore offtopic.
PHP came after (and was a response to / copy of) Microsoft's ASP platform.
Furthermore, I don't think comparing PHP to WebForms+C#/VB is a valid comparison at all.
The most probable reason for this might be code portability. If you force yourself to write code on a PPC machine then the odds are much better that you'll end up with portable code (as you already know a bazillion x86 users will be testing your code anyway.)
Microsoft did something similar with Windows NT: The x86 version was only first compiled much later in the development process. The devs all used PPC, MIPS, or Alpha machines to do their development work.
Funny story on that:
VB.NET originally supported this (different access on setter and getter) but since C# didn't support it they dropped it to be compatible... now that C# is gonna support it in the next version they are going back in and re-enabling the feature.
Why it wasn't in originally I don't know, it would seem to be an obvious feature.
I like how the submitter conveniently left out Paul's blog entry on the subject:
1 /2 0/2321.aspx
http://www.panopticoncentral.net/archive/2004/1
He says, among other things that software patents are a "bad idea" and that he did not "feel particularly proud of my involvement in the patent process in this case".
So there you have it, from the horse's mouth.
Any IT shop with more than 10 Windows boxes that isn't running SUS (or an equivalent 3rd party product) is guilty of dereliction of duty.
SUS is free, easy to setup, and gives you complete control of which updates roll out, how often, etc. (It can be setup to automatically roll all updates out daily of course).
Besides, SP2 is a good thing in terms of security.
Actually the NRC has recently approved new construction permits; the US for the first time in a long time will begin constructing new nuke plants.
In some ways this has turned out well for us because we are jumping straight from Generation 1 to Generation 3/4 power plants, which are safer, produce less waste, and are cheaper to run.
Like we really need more Rhetoric from Sun... but I'll deal with his concerns anyway.
In order to use "unsafe" code from managed C++ (or unsafe blocks in C#) you must have "FullTrust" security rights, otherwise the code fails to run.
You could shoot yourself in the foot but the runtime is perfectly capable of detecting and coping with corruption of the managed heap (generally by closing down the offending AppDomain.) Of course you can write a COM component in C++ and call it from dotnet, which is (in effect) the same exact thing! (I dare you to try and stop me from trashing Java or dotnet once I'm loaded in process via JNI or COM...)
CAS (Code Access Security) means that no other code can call your "unsafe" methods without FullTrust either, so there is no danger from code running off the web of doing this.
JNI is the same thing, Sun just gets to hide behind the lie since the risks aren't known by or integrated with the platform. At least with unsafe code the runtime is fully aware of that pointer voodoo magic you are trying to pull and can deal with it appropriately.
In other words Game Developer X can hand-tune the rendering algorithm inside the "unsafe" code areas, but develop the rest of the platform in fully managed code, making the development process much easier to write, test, and debug.
(As an aside, thanks to the antitrust ruling Microsoft is not allowed to comment on a great many things, including competitors. I don't know if this falls under that heading, but in many cases Microsoft's employees can't just come out and call bullshit when they see it for legal reasons.)
In conclusion: Sun should shut the hell up.
I stopped watching for two reasons:
1. Temporal Cold War. The dumbest idea ever. Just because we are doing a Star Trek show set in the past (relatively) doesn't mean we need to create an artificial plot device to drag the future into it.
2. T'Pol having sex. As much as she is a hottie, what is the point of having a Vulcan on board who doesn't act like one?
After the 15th temporal cold war episode where T'Pol is falling in love with whats-his-face I just turned it off and never watched another episode again.
progman.exe in Windows XP is just a stub to intercept DDE calls and process launches for Explorer, typically for older Windows 3.x programs that were written to depend upon its presence.
The number of appcompat hacks, workarounds, et al is really very staggering. Linus has the benefit of just changing something and telling everyone to fuck off when their stuff breaks. Microsoft has paying customers that don't take kindly to the same sort of treatment.
It appears you don't have your facts straight either.
NASA didn't catch the error because Alenia Spazio refused to share details since they saw JPL as competitors; NASA was never allowed to see the receiver design. They assumed the Italians were smart enough to compensate for the effect on their own, which proved not to be the case.
He most likely signs that way to fill in the signature line completely, sorta like drawing a long line on a paper check to fully take up the "amount" field.
Why that would be necessary I dont know, but there you have it.
Just for comparison Windows XP/2003 use a parallel boot process (along with preloading based on previous boot history). All services (daemons) have dependency lists and services are started as soon as their dependencies are met and run in parallel.
IIRC the biggest speedup came from kicking off the network subsystem asyncronously very early in the process so everything wasn't waiting on DHCP, et al.
My workstation here at work boots in about 15 seconds flat to the login prompt. My home system takes a lot longer because SCSI RAID cards take forever to initialize (as some of you know.)
Anyway like I said: this post just for comparison. I still think BeOS holds the world record for boot speed.