Actually, he's developed a closed source P2P app and promised to open the specs when he's finished writing them. But everyone's too impatient for that.
For a protocol where the peers matter so much, Gnutella works surprisingly well. That's been because the developers worked together very much to keep things going properly and sharing improvements ahead of time to let everyone adapt.
Shareaza broke that.
That's because the kind of improvements Mike wanted to make couldn't be done with that kind of model. They're things that you just can't know about until you've tried them, and a public beta was probably the only way of making it work. Of course, maybe he should have prioritised the documentation of the protocol over the post-beta releases, but that's just one side of the argument. Others would say users are more important than the other developers.
vengeance:/var/spool/mail# echo -e "\e]2;;echo This is to see how queer putty is\a\e[21t\e]2;xterm\aPress Enter>\e[8m;" Press Enter>; vengeance:/var/spool/mail#
And that's with quite an old version (dev snapshot 2001-03-29 in fact). Maybe the vulnerability was only introduced recently?
Just looked through the CVS logs - looks like it was introduced on Sun Nov 25 15:21:25 2001 UTC (terminal.c, revision 1.90).
Doing large-scale web development poses special problems that are not covered by conventional SCM systems.
Yes, but which parts of this patent describe resolutions to these problems? I've just read through it all and... guess what, nothing that you've mentioned is actually mentioned in any of the claims of this patent. Yes, this kind of problem is discussed briefly in the background info, but the actual claims of the patent don't seem to cover anything that CVS can't do. All of the claims talk about analysing modified files and resolving conflicts between them - not relocating virtual base addresses, or integrating into web server environments, or anything like that - their product might well do these things, but their patent doesn't cover that. It covers the application of version control systems to web sites. Plainly and simply. CVS is a system that "infringes" pretty much all of these claims (I think it actually uses a slightly different method for resolving conflicts, so one or two of the claims might not be there, but most of them are) when used to maintain a web site.
8 years ago Microsoft was positively pleasant compared with current behaviour.
Huh? Is it just me that missed that Microsoft? I mean, we're talking about the height of their worst behaviour here. This is during the time period when they were doing everything they could to make OS/2 appear to be incompatible with everything and something you'd only install if you didn't care about the rest of the world. At the same time they were giving OEMs a bad deal if they offered OS/2 packages. They were being intentionally slow with releasing APIs to Netscape in order to give IE a head start in integration with their new desktop. Its only a few years after the fiasco of the piece of code in Windows 3.1 betas that intentionally stopped them from working on DOS clones, despite the fact that it would have worked fine, thus practically ending any hint of a reputation DR-DOS might have been building up...
As far as I can tell [...] the student who put this together might collect a ton of data about your personal listening habits for a year and then [...] sell it all to marketers who promptly turn it into a paid service.
Fortunately, this service is being run from the UK. The Data Protection Act would have something to say about the matter - if the information contains anything personally identifying it cannot be disclosed in order to be used for commercial purposes without a whole load of criteria being met. Including that you have given your permission for it to be used that way IIRC. So you should feel safe from your personal info being harvested in this way.
Of course, I'm not a law professional, so I can't actually give you legal advice, and you should just take the above as inane ramblings that have nothing whatsoever to do with you, and are probably completely wrong.
There's figures on the web site linked from the article. They talk about doubling the efficiency of standard outboard engines which they rate at 16-18% efficiency, so yeah, they're beating 30%. Its also going to be *much* smaller & lighter, so there's more room for fuel/explosive.
since the water is only 3 or 4 degrees warmer after it exhausts from the blast chamber, would trout that has been killed by being sucked up by the engine be in one piece and good to eat if you turned around and began to scoop up your trail of dead sucked up fish? It would be the simplest fishing trip since the invention of dynamite
No. Its described as 'macerating' anything solid it takes in. Basically, you'd get trout soup out of the other end. But then what would you expect - the thing works by injecting a stream of steam into water at faster than sound speeds. That's gotta be worse than just knocking em on the head with a shockwave or two...
There's a video documentary you can get about how Metallica recorded the album mentioned in the comment you quoted. Its been years since I saw it, so I don't remember the precise details, but yes, they were pretty much writing the stuff as they recorded it. Also they did a lot more than 3 or 4 takes on some of the stuff, particularly the vocals - prior to this most Metallica vocals were very rough & raw; they went for a much more refined sound and weren't used to producing it, which is one of the reasons it took so long.
Of course, that didn't please a lot of the older fans, but it got them many new ones, so who knows whether it was good move or not...
A typeface cannot be copyrighted, but I suspect a font file can be. Its OK to take the printed images of a typeface, scan them and remake a new font file from them, but I don't think you can just rip the.TTFs out of a Windows distribution and copy 'em around.
Yeah, but it even looks different. Not that that's surprising either, seing as its been long known that a cat's markings are the results of random variations, similar to the way a human's fingerprint is determined.
You'll find it here. Its a contest for new writers, judged by some fairly well known SF and Fantasy writers. Many of the writers have never published anything since winning their prize, but a lot of them have gone on, and the stories from the anthologies are pretty good by themselves anyway.
Also have a look through the winners of the Nebula award (sorry I don't have a URL) and check out anyone on there that you don't know. They're almost always excellent.
I second David and Leigh Eddings, the Belgariad and the Malloreon are two of my all-time favourite series.
I'm currently reading The Redemption of Althalus (by those two) for the second time around. While it ain't exactly SF (it's fantasy with a few SF type ideas thrown in for good measure), it's a remarkably good book to say I picked it up in a remaindered stock shop... The characterisations are definitely excellent. Worth hunting down.
Actually, the point is that with the average commercial operating system (i.e. Windows), doing something like this would be a _lot_ more difficult, if not impossible.
The point is that, sure, you can modify the standard file open/save dialog box, but then you would find 5000 applications which use their own customised version and which no longer work correctly (eg MS Office does not use the standard Windows file dialog boxes). No single person could get access to the source of all these applications and fix them to use it as well, so the system would be pretty much pointless for most people.
Of course, with open source software, the same sort of fragmentation happens, but now, anyone who thinks this is a good idea can add the feature to any open source application they choose. That being said, it probably won't happen to most of them, but at least the possibility is there, and if anybody *really* cares they *can* do it...
I've sent reports to many ISP's abuse addresses. I think something under 10% of them actually reply with a human answer (about 30% or so seem to have autoresponders). I once talked to an ISP rep. about this record, and his company's policy (and I gather many others) is to act silently on spam reports. Responding to them often just annoys the reporter further, apperently...
I was reading one of those memos that was grabbed of MS's ftp server the other day, and apparently when it was on BSD, the static pages of hotmail were served by Boa. So yes, it can take the strain....
You realize that what you are suggesting is very naive?
It is?
There's a whole class of computing at the embedded system layer. I don't know about you, but I don't want the defibrillator keeping me alive suddenly pause while it's garbage collecting some values.
Nobody mentioned anything about GC before you did.
When was the last time you worked with a modern gargage collected system, anyway? These days, those pauses are no longer necessary. Besides, what defibrillator does is simple enough that there'll be no need for any dynamic allocation at all.
Or in terms of "general computing", the software for an air-traffic controllers needs to make millions (if not billions) of calculations on a radar beam to decide the position and velocity, if any, of an incoming plane. Computers are fast, but memory is slow The OS is going to be spending time allocating memory and bounds checking each radar ping; meanwhile planes will be crashing.
Uh-huh? If its that complex, how come we managed to write systems that could achieve the required results ten years ago, when the fastest processors available where ~ 1/15th the speed of those available today, and memory had a typical response time of 80ns, as opposed to the ~7ns (133MHz) of today?
Excellent. That more than anything else mentioned (other than that I like the baen library idea and have been meaning to buy one of their books for a while...) makes me want to buy this.
As someone who has recently taken the time to write such a scene for a novel he's currently working on, I think I can truly appreciate somebody else's efforts.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, he's developed a closed source P2P app and promised to open the specs when he's finished writing them. But everyone's too impatient for that.
1) Lock 'em in
2) Spyware
3) ???
4) Profit
I don't think that's what he had in mind....
For a protocol where the peers matter so much, Gnutella works surprisingly well. That's been because the developers worked together very much to keep things going properly and sharing improvements ahead of time to let everyone adapt.
Shareaza broke that.
That's because the kind of improvements Mike wanted to make couldn't be done with that kind of model. They're things that you just can't know about until you've tried them, and a public beta was probably the only way of making it work. Of course, maybe he should have prioritised the documentation of the protocol over the post-beta releases, but that's just one side of the argument. Others would say users are more important than the other developers.
And that's with quite an old version (dev snapshot 2001-03-29 in fact). Maybe the vulnerability was only introduced recently?
Just looked through the CVS logs - looks like it was introduced on Sun Nov 25 15:21:25 2001 UTC (terminal.c, revision 1.90).
Submit the patent idea to the patent office- as a "pending patent".
Sorry - I read that as 'patent the idea of patents...' They might just be that stupid, you know...?
Doing large-scale web development poses special problems that are not covered by conventional SCM systems.
Yes, but which parts of this patent describe resolutions to these problems? I've just read through it all and... guess what, nothing that you've mentioned is actually mentioned in any of the claims of this patent. Yes, this kind of problem is discussed briefly in the background info, but the actual claims of the patent don't seem to cover anything that CVS can't do. All of the claims talk about analysing modified files and resolving conflicts between them - not relocating virtual base addresses, or integrating into web server environments, or anything like that - their product might well do these things, but their patent doesn't cover that. It covers the application of version control systems to web sites. Plainly and simply. CVS is a system that "infringes" pretty much all of these claims (I think it actually uses a slightly different method for resolving conflicts, so one or two of the claims might not be there, but most of them are) when used to maintain a web site.
8 years ago Microsoft was positively pleasant compared with current behaviour.
Huh? Is it just me that missed that Microsoft? I mean, we're talking about the height of their worst behaviour here. This is during the time period when they were doing everything they could to make OS/2 appear to be incompatible with everything and something you'd only install if you didn't care about the rest of the world. At the same time they were giving OEMs a bad deal if they offered OS/2 packages. They were being intentionally slow with releasing APIs to Netscape in order to give IE a head start in integration with their new desktop. Its only a few years after the fiasco of the piece of code in Windows 3.1 betas that intentionally stopped them from working on DOS clones, despite the fact that it would have worked fine, thus practically ending any hint of a reputation DR-DOS might have been building up...
Or are you talking about a different Microsoft?
McKenna has certainly hinted towards and experienced mushrooms causing ESP
... that... I think you must be psychichic...'
But usually only when its the 'observer' of the ESP experiment taking them.
'Wow - how did you know he was going to do
As far as I can tell [...] the student who put this together might collect a ton of data about your personal listening habits for a year and then [...] sell it all to marketers who promptly turn it into a paid service.
Fortunately, this service is being run from the UK. The Data Protection Act would have something to say about the matter - if the information contains anything personally identifying it cannot be disclosed in order to be used for commercial purposes without a whole load of criteria being met. Including that you have given your permission for it to be used that way IIRC. So you should feel safe from your personal info being harvested in this way.
Of course, I'm not a law professional, so I can't actually give you legal advice, and you should just take the above as inane ramblings that have nothing whatsoever to do with you, and are probably completely wrong.
There's figures on the web site linked from the article. They talk about doubling the efficiency of standard outboard engines which they rate at 16-18% efficiency, so yeah, they're beating 30%. Its also going to be *much* smaller & lighter, so there's more room for fuel/explosive.
since the water is only 3 or 4 degrees warmer after it exhausts from the blast chamber, would trout that has been killed by being sucked up by the engine be in one piece and good to eat if you turned around and began to scoop up your trail of dead sucked up fish? It would be the simplest fishing trip since the invention of dynamite
No. Its described as 'macerating' anything solid it takes in. Basically, you'd get trout soup out of the other end. But then what would you expect - the thing works by injecting a stream of steam into water at faster than sound speeds. That's gotta be worse than just knocking em on the head with a shockwave or two...
Maybe I'm being a bit dense here, but I can't figure out what that code is intended to do, so I doubt any real compiler could do the same.
It looks to me like you're trying to bind an array of 512 sockets to listen for incoming connections on port 0 of any address.
Now, first of all, TCP port 0 is reserved - you can't use it. Any attempt to use port 0 gives an error in any correctly written TCP/IP implementation.
Second - why would you want to bind 512 sockets all to listen for connections on the same incoming address? I don't think this is at all sensible.
Also, what's this 'for each y in socket[y]' business supposed to mean? It doesn't make much sense to me.
Just what are you trying to achieve?
I have 'From:.*hotmail\.com' giving 4 points in my spam filtering system. 9 points blocks the e-mail.
There's a video documentary you can get about how Metallica recorded the album mentioned in the comment you quoted. Its been years since I saw it, so I don't remember the precise details, but yes, they were pretty much writing the stuff as they recorded it. Also they did a lot more than 3 or 4 takes on some of the stuff, particularly the vocals - prior to this most Metallica vocals were very rough & raw; they went for a much more refined sound and weren't used to producing it, which is one of the reasons it took so long.
Of course, that didn't please a lot of the older fans, but it got them many new ones, so who knows whether it was good move or not...
A typeface cannot be copyrighted, but I suspect a font file can be. Its OK to take the printed images of a typeface, scan them and remake a new font file from them, but I don't think you can just rip the .TTFs out of a Windows distribution and copy 'em around.
IANAL, though, so I could be wrong...
Yeah, but it even looks different. Not that that's surprising either, seing as its been long known that a cat's markings are the results of random variations, similar to the way a human's fingerprint is determined.
... so I'll mention it.
You'll find it here. Its a contest for new writers, judged by some fairly well known SF and Fantasy writers. Many of the writers have never published anything since winning their prize, but a lot of them have gone on, and the stories from the anthologies are pretty good by themselves anyway.
Also have a look through the winners of the Nebula award (sorry I don't have a URL) and check out anyone on there that you don't know. They're almost always excellent.
I second David and Leigh Eddings, the Belgariad and the Malloreon are two of my all-time favourite series.
I'm currently reading The Redemption of Althalus (by those two) for the second time around. While it ain't exactly SF (it's fantasy with a few SF type ideas thrown in for good measure), it's a remarkably good book to say I picked it up in a remaindered stock shop... The characterisations are definitely excellent. Worth hunting down.
...run a complete common lisp environment with MicroEmacs on a 640kb DOS 8088 PC ... The way it does that is by swapping to an 8 MB backing store file
I've heard emacs described as 'Eight Megs And Constantly Swapping', but I didn't realise it was based in this kind of truth...
... IBM has an OS/2 strategy?! :-)
Actually, the point is that with the average commercial operating system (i.e. Windows), doing something like this would be a _lot_ more difficult, if not impossible.
The point is that, sure, you can modify the standard file open/save dialog box, but then you would find 5000 applications which use their own customised version and which no longer work correctly (eg MS Office does not use the standard Windows file dialog boxes). No single person could get access to the source of all these applications and fix them to use it as well, so the system would be pretty much pointless for most people.
Of course, with open source software, the same sort of fragmentation happens, but now, anyone who thinks this is a good idea can add the feature to any open source application they choose. That being said, it probably won't happen to most of them, but at least the possibility is there, and if anybody *really* cares they *can* do it...
I've sent reports to many ISP's abuse addresses. I think something under 10% of them actually reply with a human answer (about 30% or so seem to have autoresponders). I once talked to an ISP rep. about this record, and his company's policy (and I gather many others) is to act silently on spam reports. Responding to them often just annoys the reporter further, apperently...
Huh?
Is it just me that doesn't see that making a joke about the mafia is racist?
I mean, give it a rest...
I was reading one of those memos that was grabbed of MS's ftp server the other day, and apparently when it was on BSD, the static pages of hotmail were served by Boa. So yes, it can take the strain....
It is?
There's a whole class of computing at the embedded system layer. I don't know about you, but I don't want the defibrillator keeping me alive suddenly pause while it's garbage collecting some values.
Nobody mentioned anything about GC before you did. When was the last time you worked with a modern gargage collected system, anyway? These days, those pauses are no longer necessary. Besides, what defibrillator does is simple enough that there'll be no need for any dynamic allocation at all.
Or in terms of "general computing", the software for an air-traffic controllers needs to make millions (if not billions) of calculations on a radar beam to decide the position and velocity, if any, of an incoming plane. Computers are fast, but memory is slow The OS is going to be spending time allocating memory and bounds checking each radar ping; meanwhile planes will be crashing.
Uh-huh? If its that complex, how come we managed to write systems that could achieve the required results ten years ago, when the fastest processors available where ~ 1/15th the speed of those available today, and memory had a typical response time of 80ns, as opposed to the ~7ns (133MHz) of today?
Excellent. That more than anything else mentioned (other than that I like the baen library idea and have been meaning to buy one of their books for a while...) makes me want to buy this.
:-)
As someone who has recently taken the time to write such a scene for a novel he's currently working on, I think I can truly appreciate somebody else's efforts.
Thanks for the info!