The problem is, everyone wants to look at the same content at the same time; under the current system, the server has to send out one copy of the data to each client that requests it, so if 1000 clients request it, the server has to send 1000 copies.
Have you set your connection proxy?
If not, you probably should. And everyone out there too: The above is exactly what hierarchical proxy-cache servers were designed to prevent! As the name indicates, these servers will proxy your HTTP request(some other protocols can be used too), and cache the result. When another identical request comes in, it is served directly from the cache instead of contacting the server.
The proxies-cache servers are organized in a hierachical fashion. So when you send a request, it does not matter if it is not currently in your proxy-cache: it may be stored in another cache higher in the hierarchy. The request will be sent upward, and only if it is really found nowhere between you and the target, the target server will be contacted.
The result is: everyone wins!
On the server side, the server load is greatly reduced.
On the client side, browsing of popular sites is faster since the contents will likely already be in a proxy-cache closer than the target
In the situation you describe, if your 1000 clients are under 50 different ISPs, there would be only 50 requests to the server. And everyone (except for the first connected guy of each ISP) would browse much faster, since they get all the data directly from their ISP.
Note that some ISPs enforce the use of their proxy. That's a little bit radical, but if every ISP did that, the Slashdot effect would be a memory, and the net would be a better place...
Conclusion:
Save the Internet : set up your proxy !
(Check with your ISP what proxy you should use).
If you want to know more on proxy-caches, check out the docs of
Squid, a popular proxy-cache server.
If the guy jumped over California and rode the Jet Stream, he would probably end up... in California!
The average speed of Jet Stream is 110 to 140
knots (source here). So let's take 140 knots, which is around 4 km/min (to give you a better idea, that's 260 km/h, or 160 mi/h).
According to the article, the fall should last around 10 minutes.
The horizontal drift of the guy would then be:
4 km/min * 10 min = 40 km (27 miles)
Not bad if you consider that the guy jumps from that same distance in height. But anyway, he won't be in the Jet Stream all the way down, so the actual horizontal drift will probably be much lower.
Note: I did not forget the guy's relative horizontal speed (horizontal speed within the wind, as the guy "surfs" on the airflow). That speed is just not significant compared to the speed of the Jet Stream.
Would it be that surprising to find Windows soon available "for non-commericial use"?
When I first read this, I thought, as probably most of you did: "Yeah, right! Forget it!". But then, I gave it a second thought: after all, Microsoft already does provide some free software, IE being an oustanding example.
The question is: why is IE free? I guess the answer has something to do with crushing a certain competitor, combined with the fact that Microsoft can afford to provide IE free of charges.
Now, what if the competition on the OS front starts to threaten Microsoft? We have seen that recently, they have changed their stance towards Linux, considering it a serious threat...
So, given the above, and considering that Microsoft would still make money on commercial licences, and of course on their other products, does the "free for non-commercial use" Windows idea still sound stupid?
Another question I'd like to raise: if Windows does become free (let's say for any use, to broaden the topic), what would the consequences be?
If you are found of Dyson spheres, beanstalks, spacehooks, terraforming and other stellar husbandry, check out the following site, full or ressources on these topics:
Megascale engineering is about building/creating or using structures on a extremely large scale, at least 1000 kilometres in diameter, often incorporating highly advanced and/or speculative technology. Typical examples are orbit-to-ground Beanstalks, moving planets, Dyson Spheres and Stellar Husbandry.
IANAL, but even though snail-mailing yourself an invention idea sounds good, I doubt it can prove anything. Here is a trick you can use to amaze your friends: predict lottery numbers, guess sports results, or... sabotage patents:
Send yourself an open, empty envelope
Receive it. It is stamped with the date "Oct. 10th, 2000"
Wait for 2~3 years
Select a recently granted patent you want to nuke
Copy the patent (like for school reports: try make it not look like a copy)
Slashdot Mirror
Of course! Don't kill the virus directly, but the cell that hosts it, so that the virus can't reproduce!
Thanks for the detailed explanation.
The problem is, everyone wants to look at the same content at the same time; under the current system, the server has to send out one copy of the data to each client that requests it, so if 1000 clients request it, the server has to send 1000 copies.
Have you set your connection proxy?
If not, you probably should. And everyone out there too: The above is exactly what hierarchical proxy-cache servers were designed to prevent! As the name indicates, these servers will proxy your HTTP request(some other protocols can be used too), and cache the result. When another identical request comes in, it is served directly from the cache instead of contacting the server.
The proxies-cache servers are organized in a hierachical fashion. So when you send a request, it does not matter if it is not currently in your proxy-cache: it may be stored in another cache higher in the hierarchy. The request will be sent upward, and only if it is really found nowhere between you and the target, the target server will be contacted.
The result is: everyone wins!
In the situation you describe, if your 1000 clients are under 50 different ISPs, there would be only 50 requests to the server. And everyone (except for the first connected guy of each ISP) would browse much faster, since they get all the data directly from their ISP.
Note that some ISPs enforce the use of their proxy. That's a little bit radical, but if every ISP did that, the Slashdot effect would be a memory, and the net would be a better place...
Conclusion:
(Check with your ISP what proxy you should use).If you want to know more on proxy-caches, check out the docs of Squid, a popular proxy-cache server.
--SOMEBODY SET UP US THE PROXY !
Being able to kill off cancer cells and other types of viruses(maybe) this could have huge value to people.
IANAB, but I as far as I know, viruses are not cells. From this article on viruses structure, here are the components of a virus:
The bottom line is: this cell killer gene will not help fighting the flu.
--What territory? Because the lead character is not a human actor?
Who framed Roger Rabbit (1988) anyone?
Oh, because it's CG?
Toys Story (1995) anyone?
Ok, so at best, they are improving their CG techniques. But calling that "exploring new territory" just looks like marketing BS to me...
My 2 cents...
PS: George, if you ever read this, please forget about the CG frills and concentrate on giving us a great movie as you used to!
If the guy jumped over California and rode the Jet Stream, he would probably end up... in California!
The average speed of Jet Stream is 110 to 140 knots (source here). So let's take 140 knots, which is around 4 km/min (to give you a better idea, that's 260 km/h, or 160 mi/h). According to the article, the fall should last around 10 minutes. The horizontal drift of the guy would then be:
Not bad if you consider that the guy jumps from that same distance in height. But anyway, he won't be in the Jet Stream all the way down, so the actual horizontal drift will probably be much lower.Note: I did not forget the guy's relative horizontal speed (horizontal speed within the wind, as the guy "surfs" on the airflow). That speed is just not significant compared to the speed of the Jet Stream.
--When I first read this, I thought, as probably most of you did: "Yeah, right! Forget it!". But then, I gave it a second thought: after all, Microsoft already does provide some free software, IE being an oustanding example.
The question is: why is IE free? I guess the answer has something to do with crushing a certain competitor, combined with the fact that Microsoft can afford to provide IE free of charges.
Now, what if the competition on the OS front starts to threaten Microsoft? We have seen that recently, they have changed their stance towards Linux, considering it a serious threat...
So, given the above, and considering that Microsoft would still make money on commercial licences, and of course on their other products, does the "free for non-commercial use" Windows idea still sound stupid?
Another question I'd like to raise: if Windows does become free (let's say for any use, to broaden the topic), what would the consequences be?
If you are found of Dyson spheres, beanstalks, spacehooks, terraforming and other stellar husbandry, check out the following site, full or ressources on these topics:
Megascale Engineering
sabotage patents:
- Send yourself an open, empty envelope
- Receive it. It is stamped with the date "Oct. 10th, 2000"
- Wait for 2~3 years
- Select a recently granted patent you want to nuke
- Copy the patent (like for school reports: try make it not look like a copy)
- Put copy in envelope
- Seal envelope
- Take envelope to judge
Wow, prior art...