Napster, Kazaa and Gnutella, etc. are great for poor people (i.e. most of us) or for companies that aren't making any money off the downloads to serve large amounts of data without buying expensive infrastructure. However, for a business that actually expects to make money off the service, I think that distributed P2P is irrelevant. You lose control over quality of service and availability without saving that much money.
I don't see why the music industry would use Kazaa's technology and I don't see why users would want Kazaa's nasty DRM.
They put 8 DIMM slots in it. They do make their own motherboards you realize. Funny, when I worked at Apple we built up a 4GB 9500. This was in 1996. However, that was $30,000 worth of RAM. We had to keep the machine locked in a cabinet - which kind of defeated the purpose of putting it together which was testing large memory configurations, especially with Copland. Just goes to show you that Dilbert is equally applicable to Apple.
Well, if speed isn't important to you, then if you like the iMac style, buy one of those. Sony's also making some nice looking all-in-one Vaio's that are widescreen and play movie nicely.
I watched the video. (http://stream.apple.akadns.net/ - requires QuickTime). Now, I'm sure there's many ways you could tweak the benchmarks and so forth but the Photoshop and Mathematica benchmarks rocked. The G5 was 2x faster than the Xeon.
I used to get involved doing benchmarking back in the good old days of Whetstone when I worked on supercomputers. Every manufacturer had a different nasty tweak to the compilers that were pulled out only when it was time to do benchmarks for a customer. The mantra then as now was: the best benchmark is the app you want to run (since most buyers of supercomputers write their own apps, porting them for a benchmark was a possibility).
The G5's may not be the hottest thing on the planet but they're close enough to get Apple back in the ball game. Nice systems architecture, nice case and the claim is they're quiet as well. Oh, and don't forget you can put in 8GB of RAM. Now even OS X doesn't need to swap:-)
It may not be quite as brain-damaged as it sounds. When I did large presentations for Apple I would do the content for the slides and a rough cut at the graphics and then turn them over to a graphics artist. They turn out looking a lot better but the graphics art part is pretty rote, it's just something you don't let engineers do:-).
I think I've gotten better as I've gotten older
on
Ageism in IT?
·
· Score: 1
If I count from when I was typing things in on the machine at the local Radio Shack, I've been programming for 24 years now. The last few years, I've been noticing that a lot more of my code works the first time. I'm not sure if the tools are getting better or if it's just more experience but I get a hell of a lot more done today than I did ten years ago. Leaves more time for Quake.
I do run my own SMTP server on leased machine. However, my home DSL provider BLOCKS outgoing port 25 to prevent spam so I have to route e-mail through their SMTP server. Reverse MX will break my e-mail, unless I start running my own DNS service too.
You're mixing things up here. A high-bypass turbofan (jet engine) on a passenger jet is what the name implies - a fan hooked to a turbine. The core of the thing is a jet engine that pulls in air and burns it with jet fuel, but the majority of the thrust is caused by that core engine turning the big fan in front. Most of the air doesn't get burnt, it just gets sucked through by the fan and out the back to create thrust. You could replace the core with an electric engine (or turn a propeller) - the question is the power to weight ratio, not anything to do with the amount of propellant.
Hard drives are slow at seeking - in moving data they're moderately quick and SCSI is designed to support multiple drives per bus, moving data simultaneously. Ultra SCSI 320 moves data at 320 MB/sec - what's slow about that? "Standard" (33 MHz, 32 bit) PCI tops out at 133 MB/s. PCI-X at 1GB/s would be a fine thing, but isn't really available yet.
I've been thinking along similar lines, but rather than taxing each e-mail sent, set up an open, low-cost certificate registry. Certs could cost $1 apiece or perhaps free, subsidized by commercial mailers. In order to get a cert you have to have the usual verifiable stuff. have commercial e-mailer certs available for, say, $100, plus they are marked as commercial mailers. Then, only accept e-mail that's been signed properly. Anyone abusing a personal certificate gets blacklisted. If you don't want commercial e-mail, chuck anything signed by a commercial cert.
There is nothing unlawful about giving up your right to copy. A licensing agreement is fully enforceable. However, shrinkrap/clickwrap EULAs are BS because they aren't really contracts. As this lawsuit points out you are sold one thing (a box wiht software in it) and then later asked to accept something different (a license to use the software).
There's nothing wrong with Microsoft leasing you copyrighted software or books. You rent copyrighted material at the video store all the time. The producers of the movie did not give up their copyright to rent it to you.
Nonsense. Books don't come with EULA's and you're not allowed to distribute copies of them for free, etc. The licensing system we have today comes about because once upon a time software was NOT copyrightable (that's right boys and girls). You could manage it as a trade secret which would require an End User License Agreement to keep it secret. When software became copyrightable the EULA mentality was already entrenched. Shrinkwrap EULAs are BS - you are already limited by copyright and anything beyond that is baloney.
Baloney. This is NOT the most important thing for a computer lab administrator to take care of. Keeping the systems running and not losing data are the most important tasks. I can't find all the warranty cards for my appliances (washer, dryer, etc.). Does this mean that the AMA (Appliance Manufacturers Association) gets to come and take them from me? When we bought Oracle we got jack - no CD's, no proof of purchase forms, nada. I asked our sales rep and she said "But our database shows that your purchased it, what more do you want?"
Lessig a good point in his article of how just about every digital use of information involves copying. Perhaps all of the craziness that we're going through is just a result of poor semantics. We've focused on "copying" because our term is "copyright". In reality, I think that what most reasonable people (MPAA & RIAA need not apply) could agree on is that we really want to protect and control the right to distribute. Is loaning a copy to a friend distribution? I think we can all agree no. Is "sharing" the file over Kazaa with 10,000 others distribution - well, I think the answer has to be yes. Copying from CD to MP3 is not distribution nor is making a backup copy or putting it on all the computers in your house.
Lessig's main point is no less valid if we begin to talk about "distributionright", however - there needs to be a time limit and it can't be continually extended.
I worked for a subcontractor on a NASA project many years ago. The prime contractor on the project was Grumman. At one point our software was behind schedule, for the usual reasons, and Grumman offered to "help". Their proposed help? Adding another program manager!
I think that makes it a lot cooler than tapping buttons on your controller. Smash hits to bang along with include the "Anpan Man Theme Song" - Anpan Man is sort of like a gingerbread man in a superman outfit.
He doesn't understand how Microsoft's monopoly discourages innovation.
Innovation has thrived. Our software is innovative; it has not been suppressed. On the contrary, more and more people get interested.
If his technology and ideas are anywhere near as good and as universal as he thinks they are, they're going to be subsumed into the next version of Windows. "It's part of the OS". The chill that Microsoft sends through the software industry isn't carried by jackbooted thugs; it's the knowledge that innovation will be stolen that holds back innovators.
Slashdot Mirror
FW 800 does 800Mbps. No need for hubs either.
Napster, Kazaa and Gnutella, etc. are great for poor people (i.e. most of us) or for companies that aren't making any money off the downloads to serve large amounts of data without buying expensive infrastructure. However, for a business that actually expects to make money off the service, I think that distributed P2P is irrelevant. You lose control over quality of service and availability without saving that much money.
I don't see why the music industry would use Kazaa's technology and I don't see why users would want Kazaa's nasty DRM.
They put 8 DIMM slots in it. They do make their own motherboards you realize. Funny, when I worked at Apple we built up a 4GB 9500. This was in 1996. However, that was $30,000 worth of RAM. We had to keep the machine locked in a cabinet - which kind of defeated the purpose of putting it together which was testing large memory configurations, especially with Copland. Just goes to show you that Dilbert is equally applicable to Apple.
Well, if speed isn't important to you, then if you like the iMac style, buy one of those. Sony's also making some nice looking all-in-one Vaio's that are widescreen and play movie nicely.
I watched the video. (http://stream.apple.akadns.net/ - requires QuickTime). Now, I'm sure there's many ways you could tweak the benchmarks and so forth but the Photoshop and Mathematica benchmarks rocked. The G5 was 2x faster than the Xeon.
I used to get involved doing benchmarking back in the good old days of Whetstone when I worked on supercomputers. Every manufacturer had a different nasty tweak to the compilers that were pulled out only when it was time to do benchmarks for a customer. The mantra then as now was: the best benchmark is the app you want to run (since most buyers of supercomputers write their own apps, porting them for a benchmark was a possibility).
The G5's may not be the hottest thing on the planet but they're close enough to get Apple back in the ball game. Nice systems architecture, nice case and the claim is they're quiet as well. Oh, and don't forget you can put in 8GB of RAM. Now even OS X doesn't need to swap :-)
It may not be quite as brain-damaged as it sounds. When I did large presentations for Apple I would do the content for the slides and a rough cut at the graphics and then turn them over to a graphics artist. They turn out looking a lot better but the graphics art part is pretty rote, it's just something you don't let engineers do :-).
If I count from when I was typing things in on the machine at the local Radio Shack, I've been programming for 24 years now. The last few years, I've been noticing that a lot more of my code works the first time. I'm not sure if the tools are getting better or if it's just more experience but I get a hell of a lot more done today than I did ten years ago. Leaves more time for Quake.
The question was rhetorical - the point was that it's not backwards compatible - why it's not is irrelevant.
Please don't judge Mozilla's stability based on the release notes. Instead, judge Mozilla's stability based on how often it crashes when you use it.
That's retarded. The point of the release notes is to give you a heads up. Not all of us have all day to screw around with buggy software.
I do run my own SMTP server on leased machine. However, my home DSL provider BLOCKS outgoing port 25 to prevent spam so I have to route e-mail through their SMTP server. Reverse MX will break my e-mail, unless I start running my own DNS service too.
You're mixing things up here. A high-bypass turbofan (jet engine) on a passenger jet is what the name implies - a fan hooked to a turbine. The core of the thing is a jet engine that pulls in air and burns it with jet fuel, but the majority of the thrust is caused by that core engine turning the big fan in front. Most of the air doesn't get burnt, it just gets sucked through by the fan and out the back to create thrust. You could replace the core with an electric engine (or turn a propeller) - the question is the power to weight ratio, not anything to do with the amount of propellant.
Hard drives are slow at seeking - in moving data they're moderately quick and SCSI is designed to support multiple drives per bus, moving data simultaneously. Ultra SCSI 320 moves data at 320 MB/sec - what's slow about that? "Standard" (33 MHz, 32 bit) PCI tops out at 133 MB/s. PCI-X at 1GB/s would be a fine thing, but isn't really available yet.
Well, as you said, they're flipflops, not gates. You can build flipflops out of gates, but you can't build gates out of flipflops.
There's a simple test for new technologies - if you see it on the cover of Popular Mechanics it will never happen.
I've been thinking along similar lines, but rather than taxing each e-mail sent, set up an open, low-cost certificate registry. Certs could cost $1 apiece or perhaps free, subsidized by commercial mailers. In order to get a cert you have to have the usual verifiable stuff. have commercial e-mailer certs available for, say, $100, plus they are marked as commercial mailers.
Then, only accept e-mail that's been signed properly. Anyone abusing a personal certificate gets blacklisted. If you don't want commercial e-mail, chuck anything signed by a commercial cert.
There is nothing unlawful about giving up your right to copy. A licensing agreement is fully enforceable. However, shrinkrap/clickwrap EULAs are BS because they aren't really contracts. As this lawsuit points out you are sold one thing (a box wiht software in it) and then later asked to accept something different (a license to use the software).
There's nothing wrong with Microsoft leasing you copyrighted software or books. You rent copyrighted material at the video store all the time. The producers of the movie did not give up their copyright to rent it to you.
Nonsense. Books don't come with EULA's and you're not allowed to distribute copies of them for free, etc. The licensing system we have today comes about because once upon a time software was NOT copyrightable (that's right boys and girls). You could manage it as a trade secret which would require an End User License Agreement to keep it secret. When software became copyrightable the EULA mentality was already entrenched. Shrinkwrap EULAs are BS - you are already limited by copyright and anything beyond that is baloney.
Baloney. This is NOT the most important thing for a computer lab administrator to take care of. Keeping the systems running and not losing data are the most important tasks. I can't find all the warranty cards for my appliances (washer, dryer, etc.). Does this mean that the AMA (Appliance Manufacturers Association) gets to come and take them from me? When we bought Oracle we got jack - no CD's, no proof of purchase forms, nada. I asked our sales rep and she said "But our database shows that your purchased it, what more do you want?"
Lessig a good point in his article of how just about every digital use of information involves copying. Perhaps all of the craziness that we're going through is just a result of poor semantics. We've focused on "copying" because our term is "copyright". In reality, I think that what most reasonable people (MPAA & RIAA need not apply) could agree on is that we really want to protect and control the right to distribute. Is loaning a copy to a friend distribution? I think we can all agree no. Is "sharing" the file over Kazaa with 10,000 others distribution - well, I think the answer has to be yes. Copying from CD to MP3 is not distribution nor is making a backup copy or putting it on all the computers in your house.
Lessig's main point is no less valid if we begin to talk about "distributionright", however - there needs to be a time limit and it can't be continually extended.
I worked for a subcontractor on a NASA project many years ago. The prime contractor on the project was Grumman. At one point our software was behind schedule, for the usual reasons, and Grumman offered to "help". Their proposed help? Adding another program manager!
That trick only works with California houses
We need some new moderation options
-1 Doesn't understand irony
-3 Stupid
I think that makes it a lot cooler than tapping buttons on your controller. Smash hits to bang along with include the "Anpan Man Theme Song" - Anpan Man is sort of like a gingerbread man in a superman outfit.
He doesn't understand how Microsoft's monopoly discourages innovation.
Innovation has thrived. Our software is innovative; it has not been suppressed. On the contrary, more and more people get interested.
If his technology and ideas are anywhere near as good and as universal as he thinks they are, they're going to be subsumed into the next version of Windows. "It's part of the OS". The chill that Microsoft sends through the software industry isn't carried by jackbooted thugs; it's the knowledge that innovation will be stolen that holds back innovators.
It's probably a waste of time, but what the hey. There were only 1734 signers when I signed today - let's /. it! SIGN HERE!