Well, if that's the case then all those peering network providers are also attempting to skirt the law.
I could set myself up as a communicatins provider - I've thought of it actually - put a colo server in a datacentre, then offer bandwidth (and web space) to paying customers. But then, why not simply offer payign customers to use my existing bandwidth that I have at home. Its not much, so I can't see many taking my up on my offer, but as I'm offering a niche product that shouldn't be an issue.
Just make sure you know not to vote for the other pirate party that's standing (ok, in Westminster, not Gorton) with the aptly named Mad Cap'n Tom
Just be glad there's no Ninja or Monkey parties standing in the same constituency! (and yes, you may be surprised to hear there's a facebook page you can join)
probably, there's always a place for the old desktop... but look at the rise of the internet on mobiles, iPhone wasn't sold on its voice+text capabilities, iPad similarly (and yes, I agree it looks awkward to use), but also think of netbooks which were also sold primarily as mobile internet devices.
I think the future is rapidly moving away from PCs, currently people have a desktop and a mobile, the future will see them using one far more than the other, and then stop using the desktop altogether. That also means the things they use computing devices for will change too, it'll be all communication and networking. That's the reason Facebook is so popular with investors (God help us) and Microsoft desperately trying to get into revenue from advertising.
Desktop computing as we had it will remain - the basic office work and gaming and web browsing on the "big" screen
and I'm sure web browsing will migrate to the handheld device too, only one with a larger screen (eg iPad) or with a HDMI cable stretching out of it to the big screen in the living room (or bedroom)
Even then, gaming is looking towards moving to the more profitable consoles, or... your handhelds. If flash-type games are your thing (and they are for the majority of people) then a phone is good enough a gaming platform, especially if plugged into the TV.
As humans have "advanced" over the past two thousand years, it is apparent that killing each other is simply not productive. Well, this is apparent to me anyway
quite true. However, that's probably because we've discovered that keeping people alive and apparently happy while you use them as resource-generators. ie, look to politicians, we have a system where they appear to listen to us, and then (after the election) do what they like. Or bankers, apparently keen to "help" us afford those mortgages but secretly simply grabbing as much of our money as they can while not giving a damn.
So if aliens did turn up, they probably wouldn't be psychopathic warriors, or enlightened hippies, but are most likely to want to use us. Its not like they'd have used up all their resources before finding us, its that any expanding race would simply need more and more resources to support their lifestyles.
The biggest deal is that we need to be able to do something about them if they did turn out to be unpleasant to us,and we don't have the technology to do anything about them currently. Best, most pragmatic, course of action until we do have interstellar travel and similar technologies to an alien race capable of visiting us, is to quietly sit tight.
ARIN is the group with the authority, however, changing such an established system would be rather awkward and wouldn't work unless everyone agrees to it.
Its like the Federal Reserve deciding not to print dollars anymore, and from now on deciding the currency would be Groats. People would still use dollars for their transactions until they all fell apart and you couldn't get any notes anymore.
IPv6 is kind of the same, you'd have to get to a point where everyone agrees that dollars are no longer in use and switch.
It can be done - look to the Euro - but that would still require ARIN to make the announcement that IPv4 is no longer in use (from a specified date) and turn the A DNS records off on that date. There'd have to be massive coverage in the news and everyone would have to be notified of the switchover to buy/configure their equipment.
Unfortunately, all the other registries would have to switch too, or you'd lose connectivity from them.
I think the biggest thing stopping this is simply political will. While there are IPv4 blocks available, it isn't going to happen.
Well, here's an idea. Instead of adding a single 255 multiplier, why not add several. What you forget is that adding 1 bit to the network address is just as bad as adding 96 bits. Routers and all networking software is designed to handle 32bit addresses. 33 bits will require just as much re-engineering as 128 bits.
The changeover will never happen until the IPv4 address space is exhausted. At that point, something will have to be done.
However.. what that will be is up for debate. They could reclaim blocks from companies and then hand out 1 IP for them to run behind a NAT firewall; they could start to charge for IPv4 addresses on a yearly basis and they'll get loads returned to them; they could just say 'none available' and hand out an IPv6 block instead.
I'm not sure which of the above will happen, but its going to be interesting... I've got my popcorn ready and am going to have fun watching the sparks fly when ARIN first says 'no'.
to be fair, the bit and we'd be completely in the dark about costs, about delays is not true. After a little while of project work, the newspapers would be full of stories about the delays, the costs, the extended deadlines, the additional costs and the failures of functionality.
Actually, I started to put the links in, but then I got too depressed at our government's record of IT failures. Idiots.
Na, The biggest problem with rewrites is that the people who want to do the rewriting are generally the ones least capable of doing it.
Fortunately for them, once they're getting near 'completion' another new technology comes along and they can say "we need to rewrite it in that now" resulting in a never-ending path of technology toys, dreams and thankfully, no actual work.
But Jobs was definitely trying to inspire some FUD (in this case, fear) against the Android when he said "You can download porn, your kids can download porn..."
Good job he didn't mention the Kin, then you can download porn *of* your kids.
ah, now that's clear I agree with you. I started university with Pascal, but I already had learned Basic from my schooldays.
I'd say that university students still need more exposure to different languages (they don't need to be experts, just understand what's going on). Maybe my idea of university student's capabilities is different from what I was familiar with, and today's students though:)
perhaps because if you can do it in C++, you can do it in any other language with ease. We're hiring C# devs at the moment, but if you have C++, we'll take you on more readily (partly because we have a legacy C/C++ codebase, but mostly because you'll be good enough to work with C#). the trouble with hiring.NET devs is that too many of them are just web developers.
and now they've graduated they find the world has moved on and everyone wants C# developers. Ho hum, ever was the way.
See, if they're taught them computing fundamentals, they'd be able to enter any job and quickly learn whatever language/framework/system that company uses. Every company I've ever worked at had their own frameworks in place anyway, so no matter what you learn in college, you still have to learn something new when you become employed.
Otherwise, if colleges really wanted to teach graduates something that would allow them to get entry-level jobs, they'd teach Word, Excel, Outlook and Powerpoint.
My computer course was maths, but also Prolog, Simula, Pascal, Concurrent Euclid, C, and assembler. I think the idea was to teach a range of languages suited for different tasks. I commend this idea to colleges around the world, though in keeping with modernity, I'd do C (of course), Python, Javascript, C#, assembler and openGL.
ok, I was trying to advocate a situation where driver writers get to do the least amount of work necessary to produce and maintain their drivers, then they might put the minimal effort into keeping them current (or someone else might, if it becomes easier).
A stable ABI (I think) comes the closest we'll get to this. The alternative is either a lot of effort for driver writers to do their thing; less drivers; or ndiswrapper.
it is if you accept the status quo. If you took all drivers out of the main tree and created a new tree specially for driver code, not only would the kernel suddenly get smaller and easier to work with (as you at least wouldn't have to download all that useless-to-you driver code) but the distinction between them would help to keep drivers as separate, truly distinct modules.
Of course this only happens with a stable ABI. Break that every version and all that driver code starts to wither. Keep it and you won't have to keep going back to fix up the interfaces. A stable ABI would be a good thing.
And, no that doesn't mean the interfaces couldn't ever be changed, you can change them in major versions of the kernel, just that anything built for 2.6.0 should still work with 2.6.100
It won't be perfect, but it'll be a lot easier to manage for driver writers. I can't see how it would be too much of a hardship for kernel developers either, unless they only churn the code in an amateur 'just hack it until it works' way.
of course, those things are generic *now*. They weren't when he made the original series.
I remember when Buffy was first suggested as a TV series, no-one thought "oh no, another teen girl who kicks ass" as apart from the movie there hadn't been any.
Slashdot Mirror
one more thing for A&A is that they offer IPv6 across the board, included in your service for free.
They've always been a more "advanced" ISP in the UK.
Well, if that's the case then all those peering network providers are also attempting to skirt the law.
I could set myself up as a communicatins provider - I've thought of it actually - put a colo server in a datacentre, then offer bandwidth (and web space) to paying customers. But then, why not simply offer payign customers to use my existing bandwidth that I have at home. Its not much, so I can't see many taking my up on my offer, but as I'm offering a niche product that shouldn't be an issue.
Just make sure you know not to vote for the other pirate party that's standing (ok, in Westminster, not Gorton) with the aptly named Mad Cap'n Tom
Just be glad there's no Ninja or Monkey parties standing in the same constituency! (and yes, you may be surprised to hear there's a facebook page you can join)
probably, there's always a place for the old desktop... but look at the rise of the internet on mobiles, iPhone wasn't sold on its voice+text capabilities, iPad similarly (and yes, I agree it looks awkward to use), but also think of netbooks which were also sold primarily as mobile internet devices.
I think the future is rapidly moving away from PCs, currently people have a desktop and a mobile, the future will see them using one far more than the other, and then stop using the desktop altogether. That also means the things they use computing devices for will change too, it'll be all communication and networking. That's the reason Facebook is so popular with investors (God help us) and Microsoft desperately trying to get into revenue from advertising.
Desktop computing as we had it will remain - the basic office work and gaming and web browsing on the "big" screen
and I'm sure web browsing will migrate to the handheld device too, only one with a larger screen (eg iPad) or with a HDMI cable stretching out of it to the big screen in the living room (or bedroom)
Even then, gaming is looking towards moving to the more profitable consoles, or ... your handhelds. If flash-type games are your thing (and they are for the majority of people) then a phone is good enough a gaming platform, especially if plugged into the TV.
but Flash, we only have 4 minutes to think of a witty reply before you're allowed to post again.
As humans have "advanced" over the past two thousand years, it is apparent that killing each other is simply not productive. Well, this is apparent to me anyway
quite true. However, that's probably because we've discovered that keeping people alive and apparently happy while you use them as resource-generators. ie, look to politicians, we have a system where they appear to listen to us, and then (after the election) do what they like. Or bankers, apparently keen to "help" us afford those mortgages but secretly simply grabbing as much of our money as they can while not giving a damn.
So if aliens did turn up, they probably wouldn't be psychopathic warriors, or enlightened hippies, but are most likely to want to use us. Its not like they'd have used up all their resources before finding us, its that any expanding race would simply need more and more resources to support their lifestyles.
The biggest deal is that we need to be able to do something about them if they did turn out to be unpleasant to us,and we don't have the technology to do anything about them currently. Best, most pragmatic, course of action until we do have interstellar travel and similar technologies to an alien race capable of visiting us, is to quietly sit tight.
ARIN is the group with the authority, however, changing such an established system would be rather awkward and wouldn't work unless everyone agrees to it.
Its like the Federal Reserve deciding not to print dollars anymore, and from now on deciding the currency would be Groats. People would still use dollars for their transactions until they all fell apart and you couldn't get any notes anymore.
IPv6 is kind of the same, you'd have to get to a point where everyone agrees that dollars are no longer in use and switch.
It can be done - look to the Euro - but that would still require ARIN to make the announcement that IPv4 is no longer in use (from a specified date) and turn the A DNS records off on that date. There'd have to be massive coverage in the news and everyone would have to be notified of the switchover to buy/configure their equipment.
Unfortunately, all the other registries would have to switch too, or you'd lose connectivity from them.
I think the biggest thing stopping this is simply political will. While there are IPv4 blocks available, it isn't going to happen.
Well, here's an idea. Instead of adding a single 255 multiplier, why not add several. What you forget is that adding 1 bit to the network address is just as bad as adding 96 bits. Routers and all networking software is designed to handle 32bit addresses. 33 bits will require just as much re-engineering as 128 bits.
and 128 bit addresses is what IPv6 is.
Do you have an answer on how being cut off from large swaths of the internet is a good thing
depends, is Facebook on this part of the Internet you're referring to?
The changeover will never happen until the IPv4 address space is exhausted. At that point, something will have to be done.
However.. what that will be is up for debate. They could reclaim blocks from companies and then hand out 1 IP for them to run behind a NAT firewall; they could start to charge for IPv4 addresses on a yearly basis and they'll get loads returned to them; they could just say 'none available' and hand out an IPv6 block instead.
I'm not sure which of the above will happen, but its going to be interesting... I've got my popcorn ready and am going to have fun watching the sparks fly when ARIN first says 'no'.
I'm much more worried about what stalker girls would learn about me
don't worry - as soon as they link to your /. postings, you'll be totally safe from stalker girls, or any other type for that matter.
to be fair, the bit and we'd be completely in the dark about costs, about delays is not true. After a little while of project work, the newspapers would be full of stories about the delays, the costs, the extended deadlines, the additional costs and the failures of functionality.
Actually, I started to put the links in, but then I got too depressed at our government's record of IT failures. Idiots.
Na, The biggest problem with rewrites is that the people who want to do the rewriting are generally the ones least capable of doing it.
Fortunately for them, once they're getting near 'completion' another new technology comes along and they can say "we need to rewrite it in that now" resulting in a never-ending path of technology toys, dreams and thankfully, no actual work.
Or you could go with VMWare, which also works with paravirtualised guests, and has pretty good support.
But Jobs was definitely trying to inspire some FUD (in this case, fear) against the Android when he said "You can download porn, your kids can download porn..."
Good job he didn't mention the Kin, then you can download porn *of* your kids.
ah, now that's clear I agree with you. I started university with Pascal, but I already had learned Basic from my schooldays.
I'd say that university students still need more exposure to different languages (they don't need to be experts, just understand what's going on). Maybe my idea of university student's capabilities is different from what I was familiar with, and today's students though :)
but that's why they're at university - to learn/be taught how top use these tools. They can figure out how to write their own PHP apps by themselves.
perhaps because if you can do it in C++, you can do it in any other language with ease. We're hiring C# devs at the moment, but if you have C++, we'll take you on more readily (partly because we have a legacy C/C++ codebase, but mostly because you'll be good enough to work with C#). the trouble with hiring .NET devs is that too many of them are just web developers.
haha.
and now they've graduated they find the world has moved on and everyone wants C# developers. Ho hum, ever was the way.
See, if they're taught them computing fundamentals, they'd be able to enter any job and quickly learn whatever language/framework/system that company uses. Every company I've ever worked at had their own frameworks in place anyway, so no matter what you learn in college, you still have to learn something new when you become employed.
Otherwise, if colleges really wanted to teach graduates something that would allow them to get entry-level jobs, they'd teach Word, Excel, Outlook and Powerpoint.
My computer course was maths, but also Prolog, Simula, Pascal, Concurrent Euclid, C, and assembler. I think the idea was to teach a range of languages suited for different tasks. I commend this idea to colleges around the world, though in keeping with modernity, I'd do C (of course), Python, Javascript, C#, assembler and openGL.
ok, I was trying to advocate a situation where driver writers get to do the least amount of work necessary to produce and maintain their drivers, then they might put the minimal effort into keeping them current (or someone else might, if it becomes easier).
A stable ABI (I think) comes the closest we'll get to this. The alternative is either a lot of effort for driver writers to do their thing; less drivers; or ndiswrapper.
Unfortunately, that's a simple fact of life
it is if you accept the status quo. If you took all drivers out of the main tree and created a new tree specially for driver code, not only would the kernel suddenly get smaller and easier to work with (as you at least wouldn't have to download all that useless-to-you driver code) but the distinction between them would help to keep drivers as separate, truly distinct modules.
Of course this only happens with a stable ABI. Break that every version and all that driver code starts to wither. Keep it and you won't have to keep going back to fix up the interfaces. A stable ABI would be a good thing.
And, no that doesn't mean the interfaces couldn't ever be changed, you can change them in major versions of the kernel, just that anything built for 2.6.0 should still work with 2.6.100
It won't be perfect, but it'll be a lot easier to manage for driver writers. I can't see how it would be too much of a hardship for kernel developers either, unless they only churn the code in an amateur 'just hack it until it works' way.
of course, those things are generic *now*. They weren't when he made the original series.
I remember when Buffy was first suggested as a TV series, no-one thought "oh no, another teen girl who kicks ass" as apart from the movie there hadn't been any.
8GB required just to be a good "messaging phone". Say what you like, but that's new world record in bloat by the market leader. :)
no, it doesn't *have* to run Flash. It *can* run Flash. That's an important difference if you care about what you're allowed to run on your machines.