mplayer is a command-line program that sometimes opens up a window to play movies. The OS X gui just happens to make it easier for people who are too dumb to type "mplayer Movie.file".
As for the keybindings inside the GUI, I love them. I used mplayer under Linux and it works the same under OS X. VLC has a bloated GUI that makes easy tasks hard and hard tasks impossible.
q to quit, arrows to seek, f for fullscreen. What more could you want?
If there's something more that you want, then code it yourself. That's the point of OSS... you can code the features you want. Bitching and whining like a fucking crybaby is not part of the deal.
BTW, you could have saved yourself hours of randomly hitting keys (like a monkey trying to reproduce Shakespeare) if you had read the fucking manual.
I think what we've learned from this post is that you are a complete idiot. Please turn in your computer at the nearest police station... or something.
get a dyndns domain, or maybe use "*.andreyw.hiscompany.com".
I really don't see a problem using *.local domains for internal use. The point is that *.local doesn't route off the current link-level network. If you have multiple routed networks, then you can probably afford a domain name.
> Personally, I don't think either protocol is all that great, but I'm not aware of any reasonable alternatives.
There's AFS and Coda. Haven't used either, so I can't comment on anything other than their existence.
> That's not true. If you install Microsoft Services for Unix, you can use and serve NFS as well.
Sure, but that's like using Samba for Linux. Not the best solution. Windows file sharing for Windows machines and NFS for UNIX will cause you the least headaches.
I've used both NFS and Samba. Samba was hard to setup, and never seemed to work quite right. NFS is comparatively easy to setup, just edit/etc/exports! Plus it preserves UNIX permissions and usernames, and is ultra-easy to mount on any UNIX (including OS X). Samba on OS X just plain doesn't work, but NFS is great.
If you're using Windows, then Samba is the only answer. But this is slashdot, so I assume that you don't use Windows. In that case, I prefer the 20+ years of testing that NFS has endured (over the Microsoft-designed, barely-documented, moving-target Samba format).
No! These LaCie drives are a bad idea. They put multiple disks in one enclosure, but they're not RAIDed. That means if one disk fails, your entire life's work is gone!
I would store these photos on a dedicated server that has good RAID. I don't think full tape backups are an option, but remember that RAID will handle a single drive failure -- not you accidentally typing rm -rf * . Maybe there's some service that will mirror your important data off site somewhere. That's probably expensive, but if this data is what puts food on your table, it may be worth it.
Does this line mean that Zonk went to the WSJ and cut-n-pasted this article into slashdot as though someone submitted it, or did someone from the WSJ actually submit this to slashdot?
Either way, I'm not sure I like the precedent. (Seeing as how WSJ is subscription-based.)
I didn't read your link, because I don't really care. Yes, skype should be open source. However, a few months ago I trashed my shitty cell phone (and am not buying one until American ones all stop sucking hard... or until I move back to Japan) and replaced it with Skype. Now instead of $40 a month, I pay like $5. That's good, not bad. The real phone compainies (heh) fuck you so hard that any alternative is great. For that reason, I love Skype.
So the next time you think, "skype is really bad" remember that the real phone companies are 5,000 times worse. Closed source, proprietary, and out to get you with their ridiculous pricing, phone crippling, etc. Fuck them.
I draw out a UI before writing a line of code. Depending on the problem at hand, I then draw (again by hand), implementation details like class hierarchies, interfaces, callbacks, etc.
When you're sitting in front of a computer, it's too easy to just start writing code. When you lose your train of thought, though, you'll end up throwing it all away because you won't know how it works. If you go to your local coffee shop with a notebook and a pencil, and start prototyping, you'll have a good plan on paper. It will be much easier to implement from a fixed plan that's written down than from some idea that you have. It will also be easier to come in the next day and start where you left off, rather than going off on some other tangent because you forgot your idea that seemed good yesterday.
My usual successful development strategy is this:
1) plan UI, interactions, structure, etc. on paper. 2) design reusable modules to do the grunt work. 3) write the documentation and unit tests for said modules. This is where you get the chance to play test your modules before you've committed to an interface. The SYNOPSIS section of your documentation (where you show example use of your module), is a great place to experiment with how your code is going to work and interact with other pieces of code. Once you know what the interface is going to look like, document the methods. Then write unit tests for them. If your interface is no good, you'll know by now, and you won't have wasted any time writing code that you're just going to trash. 4) go home and relax. you don't have to think about your code anymore because "perldoc My::Module" is going to tell you everything you need to know when you come in tomorrow morning. 5) write the actual code 6) move on to the next piece, knowing you have a well-designed, documented, tested module to build on!
I'll throw in a link to a module I developed like this. It's not particularly good in the sense of using amazing algorithms or being incredibly useful, but the documentation and tests are decent.
Note that every interaction the module has with the outside world has at least a little blurb to refresh my memory about what happens. That's the important part. (It's an added bonus if some random person on the Internet can understand how your code works too;)
Although I agree with you, I must say that the numbers to compare are actually 5242880 bits (not 640 KB) and 340282366920938463463374607431768211456 addresses (not 128 bits).
It's kind of hard to compare here... it's apples to oranges. A single IP address is more useful than a single bit of memory. 2^128-1 is the largest number you can store in 16 bytes of memory. Obviously 640K of memory could store a whole lot more IP addresses... but that's not what it's for. It's there to store data, and 640K is maybe one or two programs worth. Not enough.
So really, the usefulness of "640,000 bytes of memory" is somewhere near "640" on my scale, whereas being able to address 2^128 unique computers on the Internet is somewhere near "340282366920938463463374607431768211456" on my usefulness scale. Obviously I could be full of it, though;)
All pedantry aside, my point is 640K isn't enough for everyone, but 340282366920938463463374607431768211456 IPs probably is.
Who knows -- maybe the next generation's running joke will be "Haha, jrockway said that 340282366920938463463374607431768211456 is enough for everyone. lol." I doubt it though.
> to consider yourself "on IPv6" you must be completely disconnected from IPv4
Wrong. To be "on IPv6", you just need to... be on IPv6. Eventually everyone will have converted to IPv6 because they need more addresses than they can afford with IPv4. As a result, at some point IPv4 will become irrelevant.
My internal machines don't need to talk to anyone that uses IPv4.
Admittedly, I do use a web proxy that fetches IPv4 websites for these machines, but I did that anyway. Having IPv6 lets me ssh to my machines without having to ssh to my firewall first. Convenient. And ready for the future.
People can sit here and whine about how nobody's moving to IPv6, but the fact of the matter is that it's super simple to do, and once you have, you're done. If everyone does this, there will be no "great transition". It will just be done. And that's it.
Not nearly as exciting as everyone wants it to be, is it...
> Now we're poised to create a new landscape and we're doing the same damned stupid thing.
For every IPv4 address, there are 2^96 IPv6 addresses. So if, right now, everyone has enough addresses, they will suddenly have 2^96 more. 2^96 is 79228162514264337593543950336! (I got 2^64 for free recently... but considering I have 3 static IPv4 addresses, I should have gotten around 2^97 IPv6 addresses. I'll survive, somehow, with 2^64 of 'em.)
2^128 (340282366920938463463374607431768211456) IPs really ought to be enough for everybody.
Doesn't qmail need a non-DJB patch to use IPv6? I enjoy Bernstein's writing, but in this case, he is doing a whole lot of talking and not a whole lot of acting.
Personally, my entire home network is IPv6. If people don't want to use IPv6, that's fine with me. My ISP charges me $10/month for static IPs, but with IPv6, I got 2^64 of them for free. 2^64!!! That's 2^32 more than all the IPv4 addresses in existence.
I think it's easy to see why people don't want IPv6. Without artificial scarcity, they can't gouge you for IP addresses.
Since when did the government get to decide what is and isn't free speech? It all is. Even if it deals with elections. It's nice that the FEC says that bloggers have free speech, but the fact of the matter is "so does everyone else". Fuck you FEC, for even thinking that you can regulate this sort of thing.
Slashdot Mirror
mplayer is a command-line program that sometimes opens up a window to play movies. The OS X gui just happens to make it easier for people who are too dumb to type "mplayer Movie.file".
As for the keybindings inside the GUI, I love them. I used mplayer under Linux and it works the same under OS X. VLC has a bloated GUI that makes easy tasks hard and hard tasks impossible.
q to quit, arrows to seek, f for fullscreen. What more could you want?
If there's something more that you want, then code it yourself. That's the point of OSS... you can code the features you want. Bitching and whining like a fucking crybaby is not part of the deal.
BTW, you could have saved yourself hours of randomly hitting keys (like a monkey trying to reproduce Shakespeare) if you had read the fucking manual.
I think what we've learned from this post is that you are a complete idiot. Please turn in your computer at the nearest police station... or something.
If owning *.bogodomain is so important then go buy the damn domain. If it's not worth $20, it's not important.
get a dyndns domain, or maybe use "*.andreyw.hiscompany.com".
I really don't see a problem using *.local domains for internal use. The point is that *.local doesn't route off the current link-level network. If you have multiple routed networks, then you can probably afford a domain name.
Something similar happened to me. I mailed Apple and they let me redownload anything (and added something to the effect of, "don't do this again").
Did you even think to e-mail Apple after they wiped out $400, or did you just make up the story and the whine on slashdot?
> Personally, I don't think either protocol is all that great, but I'm not aware of any reasonable alternatives.
There's AFS and Coda. Haven't used either, so I can't comment on anything other than their existence.
> That's not true. If you install Microsoft Services for Unix, you can use and serve NFS as well.
Sure, but that's like using Samba for Linux. Not the best solution. Windows file sharing for Windows machines and NFS for UNIX will cause you the least headaches.
I've used both NFS and Samba. Samba was hard to setup, and never seemed to work quite right. NFS is comparatively easy to setup, just edit /etc/exports! Plus it preserves UNIX permissions and usernames, and is ultra-easy to mount on any UNIX (including OS X). Samba on OS X just plain doesn't work, but NFS is great.
If you're using Windows, then Samba is the only answer. But this is slashdot, so I assume that you don't use Windows. In that case, I prefer the 20+ years of testing that NFS has endured (over the Microsoft-designed, barely-documented, moving-target Samba format).
No! These LaCie drives are a bad idea. They put multiple disks in one enclosure, but they're not RAIDed. That means if one disk fails, your entire life's work is gone!
I would store these photos on a dedicated server that has good RAID. I don't think full tape backups are an option, but remember that RAID will handle a single drive failure -- not you accidentally typing rm -rf * . Maybe there's some service that will mirror your important data off site somewhere. That's probably expensive, but if this data is what puts food on your table, it may be worth it.
> A number of security fixes are also present
I think we've finally found a replacement for the security disaster known as sendmail -- PHP.
How about:
/dev/audio | lame | gpg --encrypt | nc my.friend 1337
cat
Your friend can do:
nc -l -p 1337 | gpg --decrypt | mpg123
This works great... the power of UNIX at work. You don't even have to write any software yourself.
> no TXT viewer is known to be supceptible yet
:)
You've obviously never used finger. I think finger was the original buffer overflow
Submitted by the same damn person. See http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=168870&cid=140 77544.
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
:)
> 12345
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
gpg: invalid armor header: 12345
Does this line mean that Zonk went to the WSJ and cut-n-pasted this article into slashdot as though someone submitted it, or did someone from the WSJ actually submit this to slashdot?
Either way, I'm not sure I like the precedent. (Seeing as how WSJ is subscription-based.)
By unplugging it.
I didn't read your link, because I don't really care. Yes, skype should be open source. However, a few months ago I trashed my shitty cell phone (and am not buying one until American ones all stop sucking hard... or until I move back to Japan) and replaced it with Skype. Now instead of $40 a month, I pay like $5. That's good, not bad. The real phone compainies (heh) fuck you so hard that any alternative is great. For that reason, I love Skype.
So the next time you think, "skype is really bad" remember that the real phone companies are 5,000 times worse. Closed source, proprietary, and out to get you with their ridiculous pricing, phone crippling, etc. Fuck them.
I draw out a UI before writing a line of code. Depending on the problem at hand, I then draw (again by hand), implementation details like class hierarchies, interfaces, callbacks, etc.
e -1.01/lib/File/CreationTime.pm
;)
When you're sitting in front of a computer, it's too easy to just start writing code. When you lose your train of thought, though, you'll end up throwing it all away because you won't know how it works. If you go to your local coffee shop with a notebook and a pencil, and start prototyping, you'll have a good plan on paper. It will be much easier to implement from a fixed plan that's written down than from some idea that you have. It will also be easier to come in the next day and start where you left off, rather than going off on some other tangent because you forgot your idea that seemed good yesterday.
My usual successful development strategy is this:
1) plan UI, interactions, structure, etc. on paper.
2) design reusable modules to do the grunt work.
3) write the documentation and unit tests for said modules. This is where you get the chance to play test your modules before you've committed to an interface. The SYNOPSIS section of your documentation (where you show example use of your module), is a great place to experiment with how your code is going to work and interact with other pieces of code. Once you know what the interface is going to look like, document the methods. Then write unit tests for them. If your interface is no good, you'll know by now, and you won't have wasted any time writing code that you're just going to trash.
4) go home and relax. you don't have to think about your code anymore because "perldoc My::Module" is going to tell you everything you need to know when you come in tomorrow morning.
5) write the actual code
6) move on to the next piece, knowing you have a well-designed, documented, tested module to build on!
I'll throw in a link to a module I developed like this. It's not particularly good in the sense of using amazing algorithms or being incredibly useful, but the documentation and tests are decent.
http://search.cpan.org/~jrockway/File-CreationTim
Note that every interaction the module has with the outside world has at least a little blurb to refresh my memory about what happens. That's the important part. (It's an added bonus if some random person on the Internet can understand how your code works too
It's kind of hard to compare here... it's apples to oranges. A single IP address is more useful than a single bit of memory. 2^128-1 is the largest number you can store in 16 bytes of memory. Obviously 640K of memory could store a whole lot more IP addresses... but that's not what it's for. It's there to store data, and 640K is maybe one or two programs worth. Not enough.
So really, the usefulness of "640,000 bytes of memory" is somewhere near "640" on my scale, whereas being able to address 2^128 unique computers on the Internet is somewhere near "340282366920938463463374607431768211456" on my usefulness scale. Obviously I could be full of it, though
All pedantry aside, my point is 640K isn't enough for everyone, but 340282366920938463463374607431768211456 IPs probably is.
Who knows -- maybe the next generation's running joke will be "Haha, jrockway said that 340282366920938463463374607431768211456 is enough for everyone. lol." I doubt it though.
> to consider yourself "on IPv6" you must be completely disconnected from IPv4
... be on IPv6. Eventually everyone will have converted to IPv6 because they need more addresses than they can afford with IPv4. As a result, at some point IPv4 will become irrelevant.
Wrong. To be "on IPv6", you just need to
When talking about numbers like 640, it's easy for it to be too small.
When talking about numbers like 340282366920938463463374607431768211456, it's a little easier to be sure that there's enough.
My internal machines don't need to talk to anyone that uses IPv4.
Admittedly, I do use a web proxy that fetches IPv4 websites for these machines, but I did that anyway. Having IPv6 lets me ssh to my machines without having to ssh to my firewall first. Convenient. And ready for the future.
People can sit here and whine about how nobody's moving to IPv6, but the fact of the matter is that it's super simple to do, and once you have, you're done. If everyone does this, there will be no "great transition". It will just be done. And that's it.
Not nearly as exciting as everyone wants it to be, is it...
> Now we're poised to create a new landscape and we're doing the same damned stupid thing.
For every IPv4 address, there are 2^96 IPv6 addresses. So if, right now, everyone has enough addresses, they will suddenly have 2^96 more. 2^96 is 79228162514264337593543950336! (I got 2^64 for free recently... but considering I have 3 static IPv4 addresses, I should have gotten around 2^97 IPv6 addresses. I'll survive, somehow, with 2^64 of 'em.)
2^128 (340282366920938463463374607431768211456) IPs really ought to be enough for everybody.
Doesn't qmail need a non-DJB patch to use IPv6? I enjoy Bernstein's writing, but in this case, he is doing a whole lot of talking and not a whole lot of acting.
Personally, my entire home network is IPv6. If people don't want to use IPv6, that's fine with me. My ISP charges me $10/month for static IPs, but with IPv6, I got 2^64 of them for free. 2^64!!! That's 2^32 more than all the IPv4 addresses in existence.
I think it's easy to see why people don't want IPv6. Without artificial scarcity, they can't gouge you for IP addresses.
Since when did the government get to decide what is and isn't free speech? It all is. Even if it deals with elections. It's nice that the FEC says that bloggers have free speech, but the fact of the matter is "so does everyone else". Fuck you FEC, for even thinking that you can regulate this sort of thing.
> Don't trust the little endians.
Good thing I use a Mac.
> How in the name of all that's holy does someone who posts this sort of tripe get a +3 Karma bonus?
> Jeez!
Easy. First, I log in to post -- attaching a real name to your post not only lends credibility, it bumps up your score by a point.
Second, I pay $5 a year or something to support slashdot. That gives me a "subscriber bonus".
And third, I post "tripe" that appeals to the slashdot audience -- that give me a "karma bonus".
If you logged in, you could make it so all of the above things cause my post to lose points, if you wanted. Or you could make me a foe, or something.
Anyway, thanks for posting a comment that was true gold, and not tripe like mine ^_^