No, if that were possible, then the Freenet wouldn't be very useful. If it
would be easy for US police officers to track down people submitting
information on the creation of drugs, it would be just as easy for the
Chinese government to track down citizens who submit literature criticising
the government.
I won't get into your bit about implying that the current laws dictate
morality (unless I inferred wrongly).
Re:Freenet really needs the support of the communi
on
Freenet 0.3 Released
·
· Score: 2
Actually, for Freenet to work well, it needs a lot of *permanent* nodes. I
suppose dial-up/cable nodes are better than nothing, though.
Yes, perhaps the biggest difference between Freenet and Gnutella is the
amount of thought that went into each:). Really, though, Freenet is all
(well, mostly) about anonymity, and that's impossible to keep with a
centralised server, no matter how good its intentions (because the FBI can
get silly things like warrants).
Actually, no, the reason copyright laws exist is because the majority of
elected representatives support them (or did support them at the time they
were written). A small majority of American people actually vote, and those
who do are usually voting against someone as opposed to for someone. The
claim that the majority of American people support the idea of copyright
could be true, but it's impossible to know for sure right now.
Ya, it is kind of an odd news story. Maybe tomorrow we'll have "random kid
in New Jersey taken in by police for questioning wrt vandalism". I can
hardly wait.
Actually, I think that life + 70 years thing only applies to copyrighted
works published recently and created by people. When corporations are
involved, things get more complicated.
It's not that the Sun tool performs changes that's the problem; it's that
they're including GPL'd programs and saying "try it on this!". It would be
as if Tom wrote a program to copy DVD's onto CD's, but along with the tool,
he included a copy of The Matrix and said "try it on this!"
That still comes out to 6.671e5 IPs per square nanometre, or 816 IPs on each
side of the square nanometre. It's unlikely that nanomachines will be
packed that densely within the foreseeable future. If so, then you can just
go to a, say, 256-bit address space, which would give us 1.1579e77 IPs, more
than the current estimate of the total number of atoms in the universe.
Hopefully that would last us a while.
Uhh RMS doesn't work on the Hurd. I think he gave that up like 5 years ago.
All he does coding-wise is Emacs, and most of that is just bug fixes I
think (I don't use Emacs so I don't know what goes on there).
Anyway, the Hurd is coming along slowly. If you subscribe to one of the
mailing lists, you'll see that there are still a handfull of people working
on it. A few of the.debs for Debian GNU/Hurd are a couple years old, but
they work okay (mostly). It seems that there's a rather noticeable
difference between the Hurd's sockets and your average BSD sockets, as
pretty well all of the unsupported network apps I tried died immediately
with "socket exception".
In short, if you depend on the network (and I think most people do), the
Hurd isn't incredibly useful yet. You can FTP, telnet, and reportedly even
get lynx working, but that's abotu it. It's kind of fun to play around with
for a few days though (if you have a couple dozen megs of hard-drive space
to spare).
"A few tweaks" meaning completing the GNUstep project. They're still only
about 60% done (which means they've only done about 15% of the work) and
they've been at it for a couple years now I think.
Remember: MS Office will not be made for X (most likely because standard Mac
OS X will not have an X server IIRC); it will probably be made for their
new-fangled NeXTStep-based API.
Then don't read the story. Probably 90% of the people using KDE didn't really care about the licence issue. You might say that they're "not interested" in this story. For the other 10%, they were (maybe only as a spectator) involved in the issue and thus would be "interested" in the aftermath.
I'm just not following. Just because a story is posted on Slashdot, it does not mean that you have an obligation to post a comment about it. I don't write a letter to the editor of the newspaper every day and say "why would you have a sports section if I don't find it interesting?! I don't care what the Toronto Maple Leafs are doing!"
The reason C programmers don't use C++ is because it's a complete mess and really offers no benefits over C. It is not object-oriented AFAICT; if it were, then I would be able to program generically, not suffer with these "templates".
If you want an object-oriented language to co-operate with your C code, use Objective C. It's easy, it's fast, it's logical, and it allows you to program generically. If you want to a Simula-derived language that co-operates with your C code then, well, your SOOL, because C++ is your only option, and you'd have to have your headers files will be so riddled with #ifdefs as to make them near unreadable.
I'm not bashing Simula-type languages. Simula is great. If you want to program in Simula, use Simula. C++, however, takes the worst features of C, the worst features of Simula, and adds a shitload of marketing on top.
I don't see what your point is. "X sucks, but Y sucks, too, so you're dumb"
isn't really much of an argument. And besides, every time I've ever heard
Linus mention a deadline, he's quick to mention that the deadline will not
be met. I think this is the difference. Steve Jobs says "it'll be out in
the spring". Linus says "it'll be out in the spring, and I'm never wrong"
(obviously tongue-in-cheek).
Anyway, how on earth did this get to be about Linux? Linus' sucking has
*nothing* to do with Apple's sucking. Apple missed the deadline; therefore
they suck. I don't care if everyone else in the world also missed a
deadline; the point still standns.
That's just the membership policy for UCAID, not the Internet2 at large.
Okay currently UCAID *is* the Internet2 at large, but I have a hard time
believing that when they roll this out, they expect the entire Internet2 to
consist of a single organisation.
Directional sound doesn't really help much there. Let's say the sound is
directed straight at the driver's head. What energy isn't absorbed by his
eardrums will continue on in the same direction and eventually outside of
the car. What you would really want is better sound insulation (luxury cars
are getting pretty good about this).
Mind you this still could have its uses. With a little bit of effort, you
could get the same loudness from a 50W source as, say, a 150W source, since
you don't have all that omnidirectional sound energy. Just imagine if you
could do the same for the sun:D
The main difference I think would be garbage collection. C++ will (I dearly
hope) automatically destroy all variables in scope (hence free()ing
allocated blocks) when you longjmp()=throw. With C it's a little bit more
tougher. One approach (which I usually use) is to have an object on the
exception environment stack that tells the calling function what needs to be
freed(). Another approach would be to use reference counting for all the
memory you allocate, and just do a simple release() whenever you throw. And
finally, you could just link against a drop-in garbage collection library.
So beyond garbage collection, I don't think that any languages do anything
beyond a simple setjmp()/longjmp() to deal with exceptions. The problem
with doing this in C is that you end up with an obsession to make things
more and more generic until you have to start coding in an OO approach, so
you implement objects and message passing.
And then after a while you realise that you've just reimplemented Objective
C.
I was under the impression that this would be a fully functional Xlib
(probably using BSD sockets). I don't know for sure because I've never
actually downloaded their 'sample implementations'. Of course they couldn't
make an Xserver (except maybe an Xnest type deal). The question of *why*
you would want to install it is interesting, considering your X server won't
support any of the new extensions, but I'm skeptical as to just how much it
would break.
Slashdot Mirror
I won't get into your bit about implying that the current laws dictate morality (unless I inferred wrongly).
Actually, for Freenet to work well, it needs a lot of *permanent* nodes. I suppose dial-up/cable nodes are better than nothing, though.
Yes, perhaps the biggest difference between Freenet and Gnutella is the amount of thought that went into each :). Really, though, Freenet is all
(well, mostly) about anonymity, and that's impossible to keep with a
centralised server, no matter how good its intentions (because the FBI can
get silly things like warrants).
Actually, no, the reason copyright laws exist is because the majority of elected representatives support them (or did support them at the time they were written). A small majority of American people actually vote, and those who do are usually voting against someone as opposed to for someone. The claim that the majority of American people support the idea of copyright could be true, but it's impossible to know for sure right now.
Ya, it is kind of an odd news story. Maybe tomorrow we'll have "random kid in New Jersey taken in by police for questioning wrt vandalism". I can hardly wait.
That said, though, people usually do have to go to trial before they're found guilty.
Actually, I think that life + 70 years thing only applies to copyrighted works published recently and created by people. When corporations are involved, things get more complicated.
It's not that the Sun tool performs changes that's the problem; it's that they're including GPL'd programs and saying "try it on this!". It would be as if Tom wrote a program to copy DVD's onto CD's, but along with the tool, he included a copy of The Matrix and said "try it on this!"
Except for the times it doesn't, of course.
That still comes out to 6.671e5 IPs per square nanometre, or 816 IPs on each side of the square nanometre. It's unlikely that nanomachines will be packed that densely within the foreseeable future. If so, then you can just go to a, say, 256-bit address space, which would give us 1.1579e77 IPs, more than the current estimate of the total number of atoms in the universe. Hopefully that would last us a while.
Anyway, the Hurd is coming along slowly. If you subscribe to one of the mailing lists, you'll see that there are still a handfull of people working on it. A few of the .debs for Debian GNU/Hurd are a couple years old, but
they work okay (mostly). It seems that there's a rather noticeable
difference between the Hurd's sockets and your average BSD sockets, as
pretty well all of the unsupported network apps I tried died immediately
with "socket exception".
In short, if you depend on the network (and I think most people do), the Hurd isn't incredibly useful yet. You can FTP, telnet, and reportedly even get lynx working, but that's abotu it. It's kind of fun to play around with for a few days though (if you have a couple dozen megs of hard-drive space to spare).
Remember: MS Office will not be made for X (most likely because standard Mac OS X will not have an X server IIRC); it will probably be made for their new-fangled NeXTStep-based API.
Then don't read the story. Probably 90% of the people using KDE didn't really care about the licence issue. You might say that they're "not interested" in this story. For the other 10%, they were (maybe only as a spectator) involved in the issue and thus would be "interested" in the aftermath. I'm just not following. Just because a story is posted on Slashdot, it does not mean that you have an obligation to post a comment about it. I don't write a letter to the editor of the newspaper every day and say "why would you have a sports section if I don't find it interesting?! I don't care what the Toronto Maple Leafs are doing!"
The reason C programmers don't use C++ is because it's a complete mess and really offers no benefits over C. It is not object-oriented AFAICT; if it were, then I would be able to program generically, not suffer with these "templates". If you want an object-oriented language to co-operate with your C code, use Objective C. It's easy, it's fast, it's logical, and it allows you to program generically. If you want to a Simula-derived language that co-operates with your C code then, well, your SOOL, because C++ is your only option, and you'd have to have your headers files will be so riddled with #ifdefs as to make them near unreadable. I'm not bashing Simula-type languages. Simula is great. If you want to program in Simula, use Simula. C++, however, takes the worst features of C, the worst features of Simula, and adds a shitload of marketing on top.
So get a C compiler with garbage collection. Better yet, just get a li brary for it.
Anyway, how on earth did this get to be about Linux? Linus' sucking has *nothing* to do with Apple's sucking. Apple missed the deadline; therefore they suck. I don't care if everyone else in the world also missed a deadline; the point still standns.
Right, but for some reason Harrison Ford does (?)
I would think they would want him to act a little bit more like a "normal" human, not a caffeine addict.
Oops Slashdot ate my less-than sign.
#include <stdio.h>
int main(int O,char**a){10>4*O):10)&&main(2+O,0);}
Oh well. At least they've got the implicit return 0 rule in there :)
That's just the membership policy for UCAID, not the Internet2 at large. Okay currently UCAID *is* the Internet2 at large, but I have a hard time believing that when they roll this out, they expect the entire Internet2 to consist of a single organisation.
Mind you this still could have its uses. With a little bit of effort, you could get the same loudness from a 50W source as, say, a 150W source, since you don't have all that omnidirectional sound energy. Just imagine if you could do the same for the sun :D
So use a trolley, braniac. No one said you had to move furniture with your back.
So beyond garbage collection, I don't think that any languages do anything beyond a simple setjmp()/longjmp() to deal with exceptions. The problem with doing this in C is that you end up with an obsession to make things more and more generic until you have to start coding in an OO approach, so you implement objects and message passing.
And then after a while you realise that you've just reimplemented Objective C.
Oh well.
I was under the impression that this would be a fully functional Xlib (probably using BSD sockets). I don't know for sure because I've never actually downloaded their 'sample implementations'. Of course they couldn't make an Xserver (except maybe an Xnest type deal). The question of *why* you would want to install it is interesting, considering your X server won't support any of the new extensions, but I'm skeptical as to just how much it would break.