Einstein was completely unknown and did not even have a doctorate when he published his 1905 papers on special relativity, brownian motion, and the photoelectric effect.
And it was many years before his theories were generally accepted, especially by some of the older physicists.
It's difficult to overcome scientific dogma at any time. To get his doctorate, Einstein had to write an unimportant, very forgettable paper which didn't challenge any of his professors' preconceptions.
Most of the masses were already complaining about the ending being too long. Personally, I was amazed that we got as much denoument as we did. Most fantasy novels these days just go "poof" in the last 5 pages, and everyone is happy again, so it's not just movies that suffer from the public's attention deficit disorder.
So I think we got as much LoTR as non-fanatical fans could stand, although I would have liked to see Robin Williams as Tom Bombadil.
I've looked into structured wikis as well. Most are rather disappointing in what they consider structure. (Twiki is a good example of this.) Jotspot seemed to be doing it right, but google bought them and removed all the useful features, and they were not open source either.
So I've resorted to writing my own structured wiki. It's still in its infancy, but I'm using it as a web development platform.
I would also like to see semi-structured databases get popular, because they would work really well behind a structured wiki. For now, I'm using a full-text search engine which supports fields (Lucene) to do structured searches in my wiki.
Call them what you want, they are used to justify those procedures.
I'm not actually smart enough to notice that myself. A macro-study which compiles the results from a whole bunch of smaller studies actually pointed that out. But the pattern still holds for any random dental study I pick up.
I read a bunch of dental papers recently, and discovered something rather disturbing. A good 90% or more of studies for dental procedures do NOT use any control group. They all say, "we did X and got the expected result." There is no checking whether the procedure is better than other procedures or even doing nothing at all.
Something to think about next time someone you know is told they need wisdom teeth extracted or some orthodontic appliance.
I think a place to start is to ask how to map language structures and RDBMS structures into a common denominator. One should never be looking at function calls with over 1000 parameters. That is just plain stupid. One should also never be dynamically mapping each and every tidbit of every field in a row on the fly at run time and especially so for each row in a table. Quite right, which is why programmers who still have have their sanity use JDBC or DBI. This part of your problem has already been solved at least twice.
Here's how I write out a customer record:
$dbh->do(
'insert into customer (id,name,yada1,yada2,yada3) values (?,?,?,?,?)',
undef,
@customer{id,name,yada1,yada2,yada3}
);
I think that's even easier than your 3rd-gen code, and I didn't have to write my own indexing code.
the manufacturers need to take power control OUT of the OS and put it back in the BIOS where it is independent of whatever bugs are introduced by the OS programmers.
If that's what you want, do like I do and put "apm=on acpi=off" on your kernel line in grub.conf.
APM is the "old" BIOS controlled power management. When it works, it just works. When it doesn't work, there is no way to fix it. For some reason, developers did not like that.
ACPI is the "new" OS controlled power management. When it doesn't work, you can blame the OS. Personally, I have never seen it "just work" without a grundle of low-level tweaking. It really annoys me when my laptop battery only lasts 8 hours in sleep mode, which is what I got from ACPI.
I can see why developers would prefer ACPI, but unless you happen to have the exact same hardware as one of the ACPI developers, you are getting alpha-test quality hardware support. And it has been that way for years now.
I have used APM on my last three laptops (all thinkpads), and had very few problems. 2 laptops ago, the soundcard would not survive a sleep cycle, but sound wasn't critical to me. The previous laptop worked perfectly with APM (T41). The T42 has different wireless hardware which doesn't survive a sleep cycle, but removing and reinserting the driver modules in the kernel succeeds in fixing that, so I just added that to the network scripts. Sleep didn't work at all under ACPI on this latest laptop.
Is anyone tracking how many of these announcements actually succeed, vs. how many give up after getting enough concessions / advertising dollars / lobbying money from microsoft?
"I refuse to prove that I exist," says God, "for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing."
"But," says man, "the Bombadier Beetle is a dead giveaway, isnt it? It could not have evolved by chance. It proves you exist, and so therefore, by your own arguments, you dont. QED."
"Oh dear," says God, "I hadnt thought of that," and promptly vanishes in a puff of logic.
I am from CS background, and I third the nomination of digital signal processing. I had to go to the EE department for the course, and managed to get through is without taking linear algebra first, but that would have made it easier I think.
I haven't found many uses for fourier transforms, but low-pass filters and auto-correlation functions have been extremely useful in a variety of applications.
That would be like putting a band-aid on a gaping wound. You stated yourself that they are corrupted "within a few months".
2. Force reps to disclose *everything* they do on a daily basis under the penalty of perjury if they lie. Meeting attendees and minutes should be published within 24 hours of a meeting on a web site available to all registered voters.
I really don't want to know *everything* they do. But outlawing secret meetings is a good idea.
3. Force people to vote. Make voting days a Federal holiday and force employers to pay employees for that day. Count it as the cost of doing business in the USA.
Bad idea. I would prefer that the people who don't study any issues and vote for the name which sounds most familiar do NOT vote. Freedom of speech includes the right to be silent, and the right to vote includes the right to abstain.
4. Force campaign promises to be carried out. If a politician promises to repeal/enact $LAW, hold him to it as an impeachable offense.
Another band-aid, this time for a severed limb. Campaign promises are already so nebulous that you can't pin them down to anything specific, and this would make it worse.
My suggestions:
1. Vote for a third party. The two-party system has failed.
2. Require legislators to personally read every bill before they vote on it, or have it read in open assembly. No more 5000 page "omnibus" spending bills on the last day of the session.
3. Every law expires after 10 years unless renewed by a successful vote. A 3/4 majority is required for a permanent law.
Actually, many us who live in the American West consider being far away from everything one of greatest advantages. "Nowhere" (near-wilderness) is 5 to 15 minutes away.
Asterisk doesn't even come close to the most hideous code I've seen. **cough**lilypond**cough**
And my experience hacking on the periphary tools for our IVRs has been very pleasant. The code is easy to follow, modifications do what they are expected to, and the modular architecture makes adding new things very simple.
It's not perfect of course, but I've been happy with the quality of code I've seen.
I agree asterisk is way cool, but shouldn't the remote office have their own asterisk server, so inter-office calls can be routed over IAX2?
The home broadband users are screwed, but most users in that situation are required to use a VPN to access the internal company network. It's hard enough to keep laptops from bringing viruses from one network to another, without some home user innocently routing around the corporate firewall. That brings in another host of routing problems. Many VPN packages will prevent any traffic from outside the connected host from being routed for security, including the VoIP phone. If you get rid of the NAT, you still have the same problem, this time for security reasons.
I grant that you have more experience with asterisk than I do (I just do IVR apps with it), so I will accept any rebuttal to that silently, but I would still like a reason other than NAT to migrate to IPv6. It apparently hasn't convinced your company to switch.
If you're arguing that they're equivalent, or something like that.
I am, actually. You should have quoted my next sentence, which explains that they are all the same (i.e. invisible) to the end user, who doesn't even want to know about IPv4 or IPv6 addresses. "google.com" gets him where he wants to go, and everything else is implementation details.
And as a home user, it may be a bit annoying to me too, but it is still just implementation details. Set it up once, and I'm done. Now I actually have to build that website...
Most corporations don't suffer from the dearth of IP addresses that the rest of us do, and my goal is not to get around security that's in place on purpose.
Actually, 99.99% of of corporations do suffer from the same lack of IP addresses. But NAT and firewalls have solved that problem for them, and most are actually happy for the extra guarantee that their internal traffic cannot be accidently routed over the network at large.
You keep bringing up the work-arounds that are already in place, and while I agree that they work all right for the way we use the net right now, making them go away could open the door to new ideas, new functionality, and a whole new experience for everyone.
That may be true. But vague hopes are not going to convince anyone to switch to IPv6.
You cannot ignore the needs of large corporations, because IPv6 will not be widely adopted until they get on board. The bigger address space is not convincing them, because they are going to keep their firewalls whether they NAT or not, so the proxy is not going away. They need another, better benefit before they will adopt IPv6.
I'm not arguing that more addresses are bad, or that we should NOT adopt IPv6. I'm simply asking for another reason, any other reason, why we SHOULD adopt IPv6.
...and then you give an example of something that demonstrates specifically that I cannot connect to those web servers...I have to connect to a proxy.
So, your answer is "no, you can't do that without a third machine as a go-between".
I figured you knew about gateways and routers already. It's not as if you are on the same ethernet wire as I am.
The end user doesn't know or care about the proxy any more than he knows or cares about all the other routers between us, at least for the http example you asked for.
For other protocols, how are you going to convince the security manager in XYZ corporation to let your traffic through?
arguing to argue
There comes a time when you resort to personal attacks because your argument doesn't hold up, but I would prefer we don't do that, so let me make my position clear:
The end of NAT will not convince me of IPv6's superiority.
A very few enlighted people in this discussion have mentioned advantages in routing and other things, but they are being drowned out by the people yelling "NAT IS DEAD". People have been talking about the increased address space for years and years. There must be a reason why that hasn't convinced others to switch yet.
If you want to convince me that IPv6 is better, please find another advantage to talk about.
Quick test: if you have a web server running on each of your dozens of machines (all on port 80...no bucking the standard), can I connect to each of them using http?
Yes, it is quite easy with named virtual hosts and reverse proxies, and the usual NAT firewall.
I say again: removing NAT does not remove firewalls. You will still have the same problems getting your traffic through the firewall (especially corporate ones), even if the address no longer has to be munged.
With IPv6, we'll be able to tell that you are "Spot, a lab collie mix owned by Fred C Mugwump of 123 Fourth avenue, Anytown USA" and that you should not be trying to email anyone about viagra.
How long do you think the privacy advocates will allow that to continue?
Think of it as the death of Spam.
Spam will continue with 0wn3d machines and forged SMTP headers. IPv6 won't even take a nibble out of spam.
The thing with NAT is that it happens in firewalls.
Those firewalls are not going away. You are still going to have to deal with the poor schmucks behind corporate firewalls which don't support your protocol.
Slashdot Mirror
Einstein was completely unknown and did not even have a doctorate when he published his 1905 papers on special relativity, brownian motion, and the photoelectric effect.
And it was many years before his theories were generally accepted, especially by some of the older physicists.
It's difficult to overcome scientific dogma at any time. To get his doctorate, Einstein had to write an unimportant, very forgettable paper which didn't challenge any of his professors' preconceptions.
I second this nomination.
"Asimov on Numbers" is a good place to start. It's a collection of his best essays on mathematics.
Most of the masses were already complaining about the ending being too long. Personally, I was amazed that we got as much denoument as we did. Most fantasy novels these days just go "poof" in the last 5 pages, and everyone is happy again, so it's not just movies that suffer from the public's attention deficit disorder.
So I think we got as much LoTR as non-fanatical fans could stand, although I would have liked to see Robin Williams as Tom Bombadil.
I've looked into structured wikis as well. Most are rather disappointing in what they consider structure. (Twiki is a good example of this.) Jotspot seemed to be doing it right, but google bought them and removed all the useful features, and they were not open source either.
So I've resorted to writing my own structured wiki. It's still in its infancy, but I'm using it as a web development platform.
I would also like to see semi-structured databases get popular, because they would work really well behind a structured wiki. For now, I'm using a full-text search engine which supports fields (Lucene) to do structured searches in my wiki.
Call them what you want, they are used to justify those procedures.
I'm not actually smart enough to notice that myself. A macro-study which compiles the results from a whole bunch of smaller studies actually pointed that out. But the pattern still holds for any random dental study I pick up.
I read a bunch of dental papers recently, and discovered something rather disturbing. A good 90% or more of studies for dental procedures do NOT use any control group. They all say, "we did X and got the expected result." There is no checking whether the procedure is better than other procedures or even doing nothing at all.
Something to think about next time someone you know is told they need wisdom teeth extracted or some orthodontic appliance.
I had the same experience. Some replies were clever, but most were obviously canned non sequiturs.
If most of the population can be fooled by McCain and Obama, we shouldn't be surprised that they can be fooled by a computer too.
If you're carrying numbers when dividing, I guess you are inventing new math :-)
Either that or merely practicing new new math.
Here's how I write out a customer record:
$dbh->do(
'insert into customer (id,name,yada1,yada2,yada3) values (?,?,?,?,?)',
undef,
@customer{id,name,yada1,yada2,yada3}
);
I think that's even easier than your 3rd-gen code, and I didn't have to write my own indexing code.
If that's what you want, do like I do and put "apm=on acpi=off" on your kernel line in grub.conf.
APM is the "old" BIOS controlled power management. When it works, it just works. When it doesn't work, there is no way to fix it. For some reason, developers did not like that.
ACPI is the "new" OS controlled power management. When it doesn't work, you can blame the OS. Personally, I have never seen it "just work" without a grundle of low-level tweaking. It really annoys me when my laptop battery only lasts 8 hours in sleep mode, which is what I got from ACPI.
I can see why developers would prefer ACPI, but unless you happen to have the exact same hardware as one of the ACPI developers, you are getting alpha-test quality hardware support. And it has been that way for years now.
I have used APM on my last three laptops (all thinkpads), and had very few problems. 2 laptops ago, the soundcard would not survive a sleep cycle, but sound wasn't critical to me. The previous laptop worked perfectly with APM (T41). The T42 has different wireless hardware which doesn't survive a sleep cycle, but removing and reinserting the driver modules in the kernel succeeds in fixing that, so I just added that to the network scripts. Sleep didn't work at all under ACPI on this latest laptop.
Is anyone tracking how many of these announcements actually succeed, vs. how many give up after getting enough concessions / advertising dollars / lobbying money from microsoft?
The argument goes something like this:
"I refuse to prove that I exist," says God, "for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing."
"But," says man, "the Bombadier Beetle is a dead giveaway, isnt it? It could not have evolved by chance. It proves you exist, and so therefore, by your own arguments, you dont. QED."
"Oh dear," says God, "I hadnt thought of that," and promptly vanishes in a puff of logic.
I am from CS background, and I third the nomination of digital signal processing. I had to go to the EE department for the course, and managed to get through is without taking linear algebra first, but that would have made it easier I think.
I haven't found many uses for fourier transforms, but low-pass filters and auto-correlation functions have been extremely useful in a variety of applications.
1. Term limits for House and Senate.
That would be like putting a band-aid on a gaping wound. You stated yourself that they are corrupted "within a few months".
2. Force reps to disclose *everything* they do on a daily basis under the penalty of perjury if they lie. Meeting attendees and minutes should be published within 24 hours of a meeting on a web site available to all registered voters.
I really don't want to know *everything* they do. But outlawing secret meetings is a good idea.
3. Force people to vote. Make voting days a Federal holiday and force employers to pay employees for that day. Count it as the cost of doing business in the USA.
Bad idea. I would prefer that the people who don't study any issues and vote for the name which sounds most familiar do NOT vote.
Freedom of speech includes the right to be silent, and the right to vote includes the right to abstain.
4. Force campaign promises to be carried out. If a politician promises to repeal/enact $LAW, hold him to it as an impeachable offense.
Another band-aid, this time for a severed limb. Campaign promises are already so nebulous that you can't pin them down to anything specific, and this would make it worse.
My suggestions:
1. Vote for a third party. The two-party system has failed.
2. Require legislators to personally read every bill before they vote on it, or have it read in open assembly. No more 5000 page "omnibus" spending bills on the last day of the session.
3. Every law expires after 10 years unless renewed by a successful vote. A 3/4 majority is required for a permanent law.
Actually, many us who live in the American West consider being far away from everything one of greatest advantages. "Nowhere" (near-wilderness) is 5 to 15 minutes away.
Try to find that in Manhattan.
> In Latin there is no such thing as an -ii ending, which is only used in l33tsp34k virus/virii.
You better tell all the taxonomists then, since they like to use -ii endings so much (on genitive species names).
Toxicodendron rydbergii
Naultinus grayii
I could list more, but I'm already -1 offtopic...
Asterisk doesn't even come close to the most hideous code I've seen. **cough**lilypond**cough**
And my experience hacking on the periphary tools for our IVRs has been very pleasant. The code is easy to follow, modifications do what they are expected to, and the modular architecture makes adding new things very simple.
It's not perfect of course, but I've been happy with the quality of code I've seen.
NAT. Same reason. Any other reason?
I agree asterisk is way cool, but shouldn't the remote office have their own asterisk server, so inter-office calls can be routed over IAX2?
The home broadband users are screwed, but most users in that situation are required to use a VPN to access the internal company network. It's hard enough to keep laptops from bringing viruses from one network to another, without some home user innocently routing around the corporate firewall. That brings in another host of routing problems. Many VPN packages will prevent any traffic from outside the connected host from being routed for security, including the VoIP phone. If you get rid of the NAT, you still have the same problem, this time for security reasons.
I grant that you have more experience with asterisk than I do (I just do IVR apps with it), so I will accept any rebuttal to that silently, but I would still like a reason other than NAT to migrate to IPv6. It apparently hasn't convinced your company to switch.
Oh, and brake pedals? Worthless, they don't stop the car either.
Heh, heh. I would like to see you stop the car without the brake pedals.
"Where's a brick wall when you need one?!"
And as a home user, it may be a bit annoying to me too, but it is still just implementation details. Set it up once, and I'm done. Now I actually have to build that website...
Actually, 99.99% of of corporations do suffer from the same lack of IP addresses. But NAT and firewalls have solved that problem for them, and most are actually happy for the extra guarantee that their internal traffic cannot be accidently routed over the network at large. That may be true. But vague hopes are not going to convince anyone to switch to IPv6.You cannot ignore the needs of large corporations, because IPv6 will not be widely adopted until they get on board. The bigger address space is not convincing them, because they are going to keep their firewalls whether they NAT or not, so the proxy is not going away. They need another, better benefit before they will adopt IPv6.
I'm not arguing that more addresses are bad, or that we should NOT adopt IPv6. I'm simply asking for another reason, any other reason, why we SHOULD adopt IPv6.
So every user would want to do that for every 'coffeepot'?
Doesn't seem a realistic problem, even if it is a technical problem.
The end user doesn't know or care about the proxy any more than he knows or cares about all the other routers between us, at least for the http example you asked for.
For other protocols, how are you going to convince the security manager in XYZ corporation to let your traffic through?
There comes a time when you resort to personal attacks because your argument doesn't hold up, but I would prefer we don't do that, so let me make my position clear:The end of NAT will not convince me of IPv6's superiority.
A very few enlighted people in this discussion have mentioned advantages in routing and other things, but they are being drowned out by the people yelling "NAT IS DEAD". People have been talking about the increased address space for years and years. There must be a reason why that hasn't convinced others to switch yet.
If you want to convince me that IPv6 is better, please find another advantage to talk about.
The thing with NAT is that it happens in firewalls.
Those firewalls are not going away. You are still going to have to deal with the poor schmucks behind corporate firewalls which don't support your protocol.
So NAT may go away, but the problem will stay.