My browser/smeller is now causing all text in the rest of the page to smell according to the "fruit:apple:rotten" class, and your last sentence smells of rotten apples with a generous helping of runny fresh dog turd heaped on.
For those Slashdotters whose browser does not automatically close SMELL tags, I'll fix this as a service to the community:
I'm very interested in discussions of licensing issues, and like many people I'm still undecided about how the GPL would hold up in court.
Yet, like many Slashdotters, I was disappointed by Robin posting this story. A single person has posted two messages to a discussion that suggests there is a problem with the GPL. RMS reponded that he doesn't think there is a problem, and no one else suggested that there is a problem. To call this 'news' is ridiculous, and the blurb that accompanied the article was highly sensationalist. That the initial submission was from the mailing list poster further detracts from the credibility of the story.
I just thought this was sloppy and sensationalistic journalism, and left it at that. With Robin's 'apology' I now feel moved to comment. Sarcastic flamebait like this has no place inside a story proper. Robin, if you want to make comment like this, join in the main discussion like the rest of us (and turn off your +1 posting right like others do when it is appropriate).
Remember, Slashdot succeeded because of the insightful comment of Rob and Jeff, and their uncanny ability to post stories that Slashdotters liked. It's great that they've benefited from Andover's business decision, but be wary of now trying to change the editorial content to suit your point of view, Robin--you may just find that you are less in tune with the Slashdot readership than Rob and Jeff.
Finally, let me point out that almost all of the negative comments that were moderated up commented specifically on the newsworthiness and journalistic integrity of the story; they were not criticising the stance of the original poster in any way. Robin's ill-thought retort comes across as highly inappropriate, unnecessarily harsh, and not in tune with the actual content of the discussion.
Here's some more info from the Win2k help file: Kerberos V5 authentication Kerberos V5 is the primary security protocol for authentication within a domain. The Kerberos V5 protocol verifies both the identity of the user and network services. This dual verification is known as mutual authentication.
How Kerberos V5 works The Kerberos V5 authentication mechanism issues tickets for accessing network services. These tickets contain encrypted data, including an encrypted password, that confirms the user's identity to the requested service. Except for entering a password or smartcard credentials, the entire authentication process is invisible to the user.
An important service within Kerberos V5 is the Key Distribution Center (KDC). The KDC runs on each domain controller as part of Active Directory, which stores all client passwords and other account information.
The Kerberos V5 authentication process works as follows:
The user on a client system, using a password or a smart card, authenticates to the KDC.
The KDC issues a special ticket-granting ticket (TGT) to the client. The client system uses this TGT to access the ticket-granting service (TGS), which is part of the Kerberos V5 authentication mechanism on the domain controller.
The TGS then issues a service ticket to the client.
The client presents this service ticket to the requested network service. The service ticket proves both the user's identity to the service and the service's identity to the user.
Kerberos V5 interoperability Windows 2000 supports two types of Kerberos V5 interoperability:
A trust relationship can be established between a domain and an MIT-based Kerberos realm. This means that a client in a Kerberos realm can authenticate to an Active Directory domain to access network resources in that domain.
Within a domain, UNIX clients and servers can have Active Directory accounts, and therefore obtain authentication from a domain controller.
For more information on interoperability between the MIT-based versions of the Kerberos protocol and the Windows 2000 implementation of the Kerberos protocol, see the Windows 2000 Resource Kit.
TurboLinux isn't hurting anyone except for TurboLinux by keeping their source code under lock and key although you'd kind of hope that a company so dependant on free software would at least understand that basic tenets of the free software philisophy and embrace it fully rather than do this "we'll open it up as soon as we think we can't make money off of it anymore" thing.
Only time will tell if closed source is the only way a software company can make money or not.
Let me play devil's advocate for a minute here (to encourage discussion, not flame!)...
Many companies like open source because they get free (beer) software and source code, not because they like giving it back to the community. Let's hypothesise (and I'm not saying that this is the case) that TurboLinux falls under this banner. Couldn't they adapt their proprietary product to rapidly changing customer demands through combining the best of open source with their own unique (and proprietary) insights?
Of course, they couldn't use GPL code per se, but I think most coders would agree the difficulty is in the design, structure, and ideas, not the code itself.
I want to see Open Source succeed as much as the next Slashdot reader. Help me believe! Saying 'only time will tell' is a cop out--we need to make our best guess now. If software companies can't make money without closed source, that's a lot of missed opportunities for open source development.
Windows 2000 128 bit security can be downloaded from the WindowsUpdate web site, which is linked directly from the start menu (I'd provide a URL, but you can't see the site without using Win2k or forging your HTTP headers). It is restricted to US downloads. AFAIK, the same security is available in export copies at the 40 bit (or 56 bit?) level.
Of course, you can download the 128 bit version by just going through a US based proxy, but I don't know whether the resultant code would be legally usable in Norway. (I mention this only for completeness, and don't in anyway recommend or sanction that approach).
BTW, Win2k VPN security seems pretty good now--the old broken PPTP protocols have been completely replaced, as far as I can tell. Mind you, I'm sure Schneir (sp?) will find a way to break it within a couple of days of official release! (It is MS Encryption, after all...)
We keep a small portion closed simply so that we have *something* that is ours.
Why do you find this necessary, Justin? Is it:
So the capital markets have some 'IP' to include in their valuations?
That your kernel mods et al are useless without the closed daemon, so the value of all your code is maintained internally anyway?
Something else?
Do you think this is something that other companies relying on open source products will have to do too, or is it something that is specific to clustering products?
No, I think the perfect candidate would be Globex Corporation, run by mega-criminal Hank Scorpio.
'And Homer, if you could kill anyone on the way out, I'd really appreciate it.'
Re:Another great one [was:Re:My favorite...]
on
The Simpsons Turn 10
·
· Score: 1
Don't forget the best bit of this scene...
Chief Wigham (sp?) and partner are sitting in their police car. They ignore the explosion, but then suddenly realise it's beer.
Wigham gets on radio, 'Send pretzels, repeat, send pretzels... I am proceeding on foot'; only time we ever see the chief running, if I remember correctly!
The particular alphabet displayed is an example of a unistroke alphabet. The patent itself refers to the specific claims that describe the properties of such an alphabet, its method of entry, and interpretation.
I don't think it's obvious at all. There are a number of important ideas in the claims:
Each character is just one stroke
There are strokes which define spaces, CRs, etc
The spacial relationship between characters has no impact on their interpretation
The characters are designed to both be easily remembered and easily interpreted.
Combining ideas like this provides the key to why grafitti is so handy on a PDA--you can write without looking at the screen, and you can write quickly.
In hindsight, having used grafitti, these ideas seem obvious, but I remember when I first used a Pilot how I was struck by the lateral thinking involved in grafitti's approach. I think the non-obviousness test is unlikely to be a useful defense in itself. Of course, that doesn't mean there's no prior art which invalidates the claim.
I'm not an employee of Xerox; I'm just speaking out because I'm sick of how everyone's a genius inventor in hindsight... Most good ideas seem obvious after the fact, even where substantial creativity and lateral thinking was required in the context of history.
I think you're being a little unfair. I don't think it's that hard to see how Turing's situation could lead to poor judgement.
His great work (along with that of Flowers) was a major contributor to the Allies' war success (look at the Allies losses after the Germans upgraded from the Enigma machine if you don't believe this). And yet, he could never speak a word of this to anyone due to the secrecy that remained until the 70's.
During his trial (he was charged with being homosexual, for those that don't know) his record as a war hero, I believe, would have allowed him to get off all charges. But no-one spoke up.
Furthermore, he suffered from a stutter which caused those who didn't know who he was to not take him seriously.
What would it be like to be a genius and war hero who was only known to most of your countrymen as an immoral freak? I'm not sure it's so clear that he had a 'self-destructive streak'... and he was certainly no fool (although he was, no doubt, eccentric).
But all this aside, how does he fit as a martyr, particularly for geeks? He is responsible for starting our revolution. Along with Godel, he developed the foundation of our understanding of computation. He had the belief in the ability of computers to do more than 'just compute', that caused people to rethink their assumptions about the role of computers in the world. He worked hard for the public good, and achieved much. Despite all this, he was trodden down by the institutions for something that most now believe is not criminal, and not a personal choice.
Try and remember how you felt in your darkest and loneliest hour. Life can be difficult, and we do not always act rationally in such situations. We should not judge Turing's life and impact on just the most 'theatrical' events.
There's not a lot in the bible to suggest that hell is a burning pit of pain, as is the standard representation today. In fact, Dante's writings, which were popular during the renaissance in Italy, were strong influences on the painters of the day. As a result, representations of hell (such as those by Michelangelo) showing demons, flames, et al, popped up; the power of these representations has resulted in this becoming the general understanding of what hell 'looks like'.
Actually, many interpreters of the bible suggest that hell is more mental than physical--a great torment resulting from immoral behaviour during life.
I don't really follow the assumption in the article (and many of the comments) that the brain can't learn new things unless it can create new neurons. Even if this research doesn't apply to humans, and actually we don't generate a substantial amount of new neurons as humans, that doesn't rule out the potential to learn 'new tricks' at all.
You see, the brain has so many neurons that the number of potential configurations through adjusting the 'weights' between neurons is almost limitless. Through adjusting these weights, the brain changes its behaviour in some way--it 'learns'. It is not necessary to create additional neurons to learn more things.
Of course, if a module of a brain is not properly connected due to some affliction (as occured with the people mentioned in the article who can't tell right from wrong) additional neurons would be required to fix the problem.
Check out http://www.nameprotect.com. It costs $35 to do a search on their databases. I tried it out yesterday, and it seemed to work fine. However, it doesn't search state trademarks (although I don't know the status of these under the new laws).
The underlying data structures in MDDs (multi-dimensional databases) are generally proprietary--and why shouldn't they be? You don't expect to access RDBs (relational databases) through reading the file directly... you use SQL. In the same way you access MDDs through a language or front-end.
An emerging 'standard' for accessing MDDs is MDX (Multi-Dimensional eXpressions), which first appeared in MS OLAP Services, although it's now popping up in most major OLAP servers (except Cognos at this stage). You don't have to 'program' the OLAP server--you just create an MDX expression. MDX provides access to pretty much all the power of most OLAP servers.
For programming the build/maintenance processes, all tools have some form of OLE interface (in NT) or other interface for the Unix tools.
The way the data is stored and 'indexed' is very important--trying to roll your own tool will _not_ create the same order of magnitude of performance of any commercial tool. For example, MS OLAP Services includes an optimisation algorithm that calculates which preaggregations to create to maximise query response.
The tools I would suggest looking at would be MS OLAP Services for small to medium jobs (up to 100 million records it certainly works fine), or Cognos (although it's showing its age... I'd wait for the next release). For bigger jobs I'd look at Teradata (which runs most of the world's biggest data warehouses) or Redbrick (which is now part of Informix).
I've got a Dell Inspiron 7000 with this chipset. It works perfectly on the LCD display at 1024x768.
The trick is to use the new(ish) VGA frame buffer driver--get the latest kernal distro which includes this (anything after 2.1.132 actually). Also check out the Linux on Dell I7k page which has links to step by step instructions.
Color--why bother on a palm-sized device? If you think about what you really use these things for, you'll realise that color doesn't really add anything to the experience. Color screens tend to be harder to read in many lighting conditions, too.
RAM--I had a Cassiopaeia E-11 (8MB RAM) before I got my Palm V (2MB). The RAM on the Palm V goes a lot further than the Cassiopaeia, because of the way that apps are written, and memory is managed.
Input Methods--I used Jot for a month to give it a fair trial. It's nowhere near as good as Graffiti. Win CE allows you to change to a Graffiti mode though, which is good.
MP3--As others have said, with only 16MB RAM, what's the point?
Overall--Win CE devices crash frequently, run slowly, and require multiple taps to achieve the most common tasks. Palm devices are more reliable, react instantly, and do common tasks in 1 tap or character (write a number to create an appointment at that time; write a character to jump there in the address book--Win CE does this to, but only if you tap the Find area to give it the focus;...)
Slashdot Mirror
You forgot to close your second tag.
My browser/smeller is now causing all text in the rest of the page to smell according to the "fruit:apple:rotten" class, and your last sentence smells of rotten apples with a generous helping of runny fresh dog turd heaped on.
For those Slashdotters whose browser does not automatically close SMELL tags, I'll fix this as a service to the community:
I'm very interested in discussions of licensing issues, and like many people I'm still undecided about how the GPL would hold up in court.
Yet, like many Slashdotters, I was disappointed by Robin posting this story. A single person has posted two messages to a discussion that suggests there is a problem with the GPL. RMS reponded that he doesn't think there is a problem, and no one else suggested that there is a problem. To call this 'news' is ridiculous, and the blurb that accompanied the article was highly sensationalist. That the initial submission was from the mailing list poster further detracts from the credibility of the story.
I just thought this was sloppy and sensationalistic journalism, and left it at that. With Robin's 'apology' I now feel moved to comment. Sarcastic flamebait like this has no place inside a story proper. Robin, if you want to make comment like this, join in the main discussion like the rest of us (and turn off your +1 posting right like others do when it is appropriate).
Remember, Slashdot succeeded because of the insightful comment of Rob and Jeff, and their uncanny ability to post stories that Slashdotters liked. It's great that they've benefited from Andover's business decision, but be wary of now trying to change the editorial content to suit your point of view, Robin--you may just find that you are less in tune with the Slashdot readership than Rob and Jeff.
Finally, let me point out that almost all of the negative comments that were moderated up commented specifically on the newsworthiness and journalistic integrity of the story; they were not criticising the stance of the original poster in any way. Robin's ill-thought retort comes across as highly inappropriate, unnecessarily harsh, and not in tune with the actual content of the discussion.
There, I've said it!
Kerberos V5 authentication
Kerberos V5 is the primary security protocol for authentication within a domain. The Kerberos V5 protocol verifies both the identity of the user and network services. This dual verification is known as mutual authentication.
How Kerberos V5 works
The Kerberos V5 authentication mechanism issues tickets for accessing network services. These tickets contain encrypted data, including an encrypted password, that confirms the user's identity to the requested service. Except for entering a password or smartcard credentials, the entire authentication process is invisible to the user.
An important service within Kerberos V5 is the Key Distribution Center (KDC). The KDC runs on each domain controller as part of Active Directory, which stores all client passwords and other account information.
The Kerberos V5 authentication process works as follows:
Kerberos V5 interoperability
Windows 2000 supports two types of Kerberos V5 interoperability:
For more information on interoperability between the MIT-based versions of the Kerberos protocol and the Windows 2000 implementation of the Kerberos protocol, see the Windows 2000 Resource Kit.
TurboLinux isn't hurting anyone except for TurboLinux by keeping their source code under lock and key although you'd kind of hope that a company so dependant on free software would at least understand that basic tenets of the free software philisophy and embrace it fully rather than do this "we'll open it up as soon as we think we can't make money off of it anymore" thing.
Only time will tell if closed source is the only way a software company can make money or not.
Let me play devil's advocate for a minute here (to encourage discussion, not flame!)...
Many companies like open source because they get free (beer) software and source code, not because they like giving it back to the community. Let's hypothesise (and I'm not saying that this is the case) that TurboLinux falls under this banner. Couldn't they adapt their proprietary product to rapidly changing customer demands through combining the best of open source with their own unique (and proprietary) insights?
Of course, they couldn't use GPL code per se, but I think most coders would agree the difficulty is in the design, structure, and ideas, not the code itself.
I want to see Open Source succeed as much as the next Slashdot reader. Help me believe! Saying 'only time will tell' is a cop out--we need to make our best guess now. If software companies can't make money without closed source, that's a lot of missed opportunities for open source development.
Windows 2000 128 bit security can be downloaded from the WindowsUpdate web site, which is linked directly from the start menu (I'd provide a URL, but you can't see the site without using Win2k or forging your HTTP headers). It is restricted to US downloads. AFAIK, the same security is available in export copies at the 40 bit (or 56 bit?) level.
Of course, you can download the 128 bit version by just going through a US based proxy, but I don't know whether the resultant code would be legally usable in Norway. (I mention this only for completeness, and don't in anyway recommend or sanction that approach).
BTW, Win2k VPN security seems pretty good now--the old broken PPTP protocols have been completely replaced, as far as I can tell. Mind you, I'm sure Schneir (sp?) will find a way to break it within a couple of days of official release! (It is MS Encryption, after all...)
Why do you find this necessary, Justin? Is it:
Do you think this is something that other companies relying on open source products will have to do too, or is it something that is specific to clustering products?
No, I think the perfect candidate would be Globex Corporation, run by mega-criminal Hank Scorpio.
'And Homer, if you could kill anyone on the way out, I'd really appreciate it.'
Don't forget the best bit of this scene...
Chief Wigham (sp?) and partner are sitting in their police car. They ignore the explosion, but then suddenly realise it's beer.
Wigham gets on radio, 'Send pretzels, repeat, send pretzels... I am proceeding on foot'; only time we ever see the chief running, if I remember correctly!
(Don't quote me, this is from memory.)
I don't think it's obvious at all. There are a number of important ideas in the claims:
Combining ideas like this provides the key to why grafitti is so handy on a PDA--you can write without looking at the screen, and you can write quickly.
In hindsight, having used grafitti, these ideas seem obvious, but I remember when I first used a Pilot how I was struck by the lateral thinking involved in grafitti's approach. I think the non-obviousness test is unlikely to be a useful defense in itself. Of course, that doesn't mean there's no prior art which invalidates the claim.
I'm not an employee of Xerox; I'm just speaking out because I'm sick of how everyone's a genius inventor in hindsight... Most good ideas seem obvious after the fact, even where substantial creativity and lateral thinking was required in the context of history.
I think you're being a little unfair. I don't think it's that hard to see how Turing's situation could lead to poor judgement.
His great work (along with that of Flowers) was a major contributor to the Allies' war success (look at the Allies losses after the Germans upgraded from the Enigma machine if you don't believe this). And yet, he could never speak a word of this to anyone due to the secrecy that remained until the 70's.
During his trial (he was charged with being homosexual, for those that don't know) his record as a war hero, I believe, would have allowed him to get off all charges. But no-one spoke up.
Furthermore, he suffered from a stutter which caused those who didn't know who he was to not take him seriously.
What would it be like to be a genius and war hero who was only known to most of your countrymen as an immoral freak? I'm not sure it's so clear that he had a 'self-destructive streak'... and he was certainly no fool (although he was, no doubt, eccentric).
But all this aside, how does he fit as a martyr, particularly for geeks? He is responsible for starting our revolution. Along with Godel, he developed the foundation of our understanding of computation. He had the belief in the ability of computers to do more than 'just compute', that caused people to rethink their assumptions about the role of computers in the world. He worked hard for the public good, and achieved much. Despite all this, he was trodden down by the institutions for something that most now believe is not criminal, and not a personal choice.
Try and remember how you felt in your darkest and loneliest hour. Life can be difficult, and we do not always act rationally in such situations. We should not judge Turing's life and impact on just the most 'theatrical' events.
There's not a lot in the bible to suggest that hell is a burning pit of pain, as is the standard representation today. In fact, Dante's writings, which were popular during the renaissance in Italy, were strong influences on the painters of the day. As a result, representations of hell (such as those by Michelangelo) showing demons, flames, et al, popped up; the power of these representations has resulted in this becoming the general understanding of what hell 'looks like'.
Actually, many interpreters of the bible suggest that hell is more mental than physical--a great torment resulting from immoral behaviour during life.
I think I'm making a start...
;-)
ROFI = Return On Funds Invested ?...
And ROFI is after a 'p' and before 't'.
So the puzzle must be that Intel are trying to make money (ROFI) after a pee and before tea.
In other words, they are trying to make money fast.
A complex contest, but solvable
I don't really follow the assumption in the article (and many of the comments) that the brain can't learn new things unless it can create new neurons. Even if this research doesn't apply to humans, and actually we don't generate a substantial amount of new neurons as humans, that doesn't rule out the potential to learn 'new tricks' at all.
You see, the brain has so many neurons that the number of potential configurations through adjusting the 'weights' between neurons is almost limitless. Through adjusting these weights, the brain changes its behaviour in some way--it 'learns'. It is not necessary to create additional neurons to learn more things.
Of course, if a module of a brain is not properly connected due to some affliction (as occured with the people mentioned in the article who can't tell right from wrong) additional neurons would be required to fix the problem.
According to ThinkOutside's website the keyboard isn't out yet... Have you seen/used one? Do you know a release date?
Check out http://www.nameprotect.com. It costs $35 to do a search on their databases. I tried it out yesterday, and it seemed to work fine. However, it doesn't search state trademarks (although I don't know the status of these under the new laws).
The underlying data structures in MDDs (multi-dimensional databases) are generally proprietary--and why shouldn't they be? You don't expect to access RDBs (relational databases) through reading the file directly... you use SQL. In the same way you access MDDs through a language or front-end.
An emerging 'standard' for accessing MDDs is MDX (Multi-Dimensional eXpressions), which first appeared in MS OLAP Services, although it's now popping up in most major OLAP servers (except Cognos at this stage). You don't have to 'program' the OLAP server--you just create an MDX expression. MDX provides access to pretty much all the power of most OLAP servers.
For programming the build/maintenance processes, all tools have some form of OLE interface (in NT) or other interface for the Unix tools.
The way the data is stored and 'indexed' is very important--trying to roll your own tool will _not_ create the same order of magnitude of performance of any commercial tool. For example, MS OLAP Services includes an optimisation algorithm that calculates which preaggregations to create to maximise query response.
The tools I would suggest looking at would be MS OLAP Services for small to medium jobs (up to 100 million records it certainly works fine), or Cognos (although it's showing its age... I'd wait for the next release). For bigger jobs I'd look at Teradata (which runs most of the world's biggest data warehouses) or Redbrick (which is now part of Informix).
I've got a Dell Inspiron 7000 with this chipset. It works perfectly on the LCD display at 1024x768.
The trick is to use the new(ish) VGA frame buffer driver--get the latest kernal distro which includes this (anything after 2.1.132 actually). Also check out the Linux on Dell I7k page which has links to step by step instructions.
Color--why bother on a palm-sized device? If you think about what you really use these things for, you'll realise that color doesn't really add anything to the experience. Color screens tend to be harder to read in many lighting conditions, too.
...)
RAM--I had a Cassiopaeia E-11 (8MB RAM) before I got my Palm V (2MB). The RAM on the Palm V goes a lot further than the Cassiopaeia, because of the way that apps are written, and memory is managed.
Input Methods--I used Jot for a month to give it a fair trial. It's nowhere near as good as Graffiti. Win CE allows you to change to a Graffiti mode though, which is good.
MP3--As others have said, with only 16MB RAM, what's the point?
Overall--Win CE devices crash frequently, run slowly, and require multiple taps to achieve the most common tasks. Palm devices are more reliable, react instantly, and do common tasks in 1 tap or character (write a number to create an appointment at that time; write a character to jump there in the address book--Win CE does this to, but only if you tap the Find area to give it the focus;