Ogg Vorbis has a real chance of taking MP3, but they're going to have to change the name. Part of MP3's success is its trendy name. It's a smooth name that rolls of the tounge, sounds cool, but not too technical.
Ogg Vorbis sounds like a new brand of Mr. Clean. It's funny, strange, un-sophisticated and not natural to say. Personally, since both are technically about the same, I would prefer my files with a *.mp3 than *.ogg.
It's small, but it's something consumers notice. Fashion is just as important as functionality and political freedom.
I was shocked by this review site. Most all the graphs are misleading. Most magnify the area of differenc between the two processors to make the margin look larger. For example, in the benchmark "Content Creation Winstone" (http://www.systemlogic.net/reviews/hardware/proce ssors/intel/p41700/i/c7.gif), the difference is only 3.6 points, yet the scale is nearly 1/3. That's nearly 3x magnification.
Some only differ by a few percent, the lowest about -4.5% of P4 score, yet the distance represented on the graph would suggest nearly a 60% difference or more.
This review site needs to get a clue about statictics and start using proper graphing according to real differences, not magnified margins.
Somebody eating up a whole bunch of processing time to brute force cyptographic codes
...
Will the processing power be so immense that it won't fill up?
Yes. Even the most difficult of tasks won't use up *all* the bandwidth. And I'm sure the system will have some type of safe guards against extreme usage such as attempts to harm it, etc. We're talking about 500-1000 MHz * thousands, and lots of memory too.
I'm not sure I understand -- who provides this "grid"? Are they built and maintained by IBM around the world? I don't think IBM would be thrilled to discover that Compaq is using the IBM grid to advance Compaq's bottom line. I like IBM, don't get me wrong -- but I doubt they're such humanitarians.
Think Internet. Right now, we're paying for bandwidth, because the Internet is largely an information-only medium. However, in the future, we will also be able to have a certain amount of processing power, shared by everyone, used by everyone. IBM is just providing the structure (and at first the systems for the demo) to access mass computational resources. Soon, you will be able to access network wide applications which are processed on many machines across the network in a distributed way.
Right now we have an enormous processing surplus. Most machines sit unused for hours. Check your load averages if you don't believe me. Even a personal desktop used 8+ hours a day will barely break a few percent. Now imagine if we had some infrastructure, which is what IBM is aiming to do, to harness and unite all this power for general use? We would have an enormous amount of processing power available.
Is the "grid" made up of PCs on the Internet? First, most of those PCs are on dial-up connections, making things very complicated (and the PCs themselves not very useful). Second, who compensates the people who own the PCs? Is it strictly voluntary, like SETI@home? If so, how will anti-nuke activists prevent Los Alamos from running simulation calculations on their PowerMac?
Bandwidth will come in time. Even so, imagine having all of AOL's dialup connections available for processing. 56k isn't that much, but imagine millions of connections at once. As soon as we get lots of bandwidth and always-on connections wide-spread, this will be much easier. It's an upgrade path too. We can still start now and as people get faster connections and faster machines, the overall system power will increase.
As far as compensation, this is a public thing. We all use each other's resources, and we all contribute to the available processing resources. The sum of the parts of something are greater than one part alone, working alone. Similar to how Gnutella users each contribute and take, and why it works so well. Just translate the information into processing power. You can take as much or as little as you want, most people falling somewhere in between (this is how it always is and is a regular pattern).
I'm sure there are going to be leeches. But many people will want to share because they realize how the system works. Distributed systems like Gnutella do work (albeit a few leeches here and there), and this is proof that a processing system will also work.
I fear that the woman behind this, Charlene Gilbert, is going to turn it into some kind of personal vendetta and have it be another story about the white devil. She is already fused with black pride all through her story, and is clear in only one thing: revenge.
She seems more concerned with the fact someone wasn't payed than what have come from HeLa cells -- breakthroughs and cures in medical history.
You can see where this is going to based upon her prior film, about "black farmers and land loss since the Civil War," this will likely be the same tone: racially deviding and told with a slanted, pro-ethnic stance.
It's sad. Henrietta Lacks is a living legend who continues to live and help people even after death. I'm sure anyone would want to have the cure for polio and other diseases attributed to their name. I personally think it's disgusting to put money into this as this film-maker woman seems to want to do. We're talking about the human species here, not money or questions of racial black-white. This is much larger than trivial issues of that nature.
You can buy some HeLa cells here...
on
The Immortal Cell
·
· Score: 3
We use this same system at work for our phone navigation system. Paired up with a natural language processor, it's quite easy to talk to as if a semi-sentient person. With a large phrase database, it's much more than an automated system.
I am glad AT&T is finally releasing a commercial product to the masses. I can't wait to get the developer version!
This is great news. Now lets see if they can actually turn a profit on the capital they've been given.
It's good to remember investors, not Linux users, control the market (and thus fate of companies). So go out there and support your software -- buy it!
I have to run Windows for some things, like, emm, Visual Studio for my work. The software for the product was also only supported under Windows. In any case, it's still bad form.
I visited the X10 site and bought the Remote DVD package. The product is good, but the marketing this company uses is down right ruthless and in some cases counter-productive toward customers.
Upon installing the support software, X10 overwrote all my shortcut icons (the little arrow which appears on all icons) with a tiny X-10 logo. It also changed my Windows Media Player title bar to say "Windows Media Player Provided By X10 Media Player". Also before previewing any movie files there is an X10 logo in the video, right before it begins playing.
And if that wasn't enough, they put their logo in the General section of System Properties, such as OEMs do. And yes, my bookmarks in both Navigatior and IE have all kinds of X10 links.
I uninstalled the software but this still didn't solve the problem. So I called the company and they said this is all in the license agreement. Well, I sent their product back and got my refund and used a registry editor to painfully remove all of the X10 brandings and subliminal messages.
It really makes me mad when a company thinks they have the right to mess with your system. And no, they haven't stopped e-mailing me promotional stuff even after I unsubscribed (didn't know I ever actual subscribed in the first place) from their mailing lists. I am also starting to get stuff in the mail now too.
I live in a lakeside community which has a large lake for paddle boating, duck feeding, etc. (no swimming). My friend moved here a few years ago, directly across the lake from my house. We used to do morse code messages to each other and soon we we're talking about wiring up a network together. One night we took a paddle boat out and layed an insulated CAT-5 directly across the lake, instead of going all the way around (would have used much more cable because it's kind of elliptical in shape).
The connection works great and now we have connected up three other neighboors as well. The most difficult part was getting the cable into the homes by drilling through wood and cement, but it wasn't that big of a deal. It's kind of cool -- and you don't even have to be a giant telecommunications company. Don't know if it's against our association rules, but I still enjoy my nightly Quake-over-lake game!
You still didn't address exactly what it is. Why would I need security when browsing content? Why do I need 128 bit SSL with news headlines? What exactly is it that it does, besides be another web portal script?
This is typical Lucas Arts stuff. I recall watching a Dateline show or something about how the company has an entire department (rather large with 200 employees), of which is dedicated to trademark management of the Star Wars franchise. It turns out that the main profits in fact don't come from the original, unique work for which the trademark stands and is protected. Instead, it comes from lunch boxes, promotional contests, games fees, etc. This company actually has marketed its trademarks to a product level.
I would suspect the boys at Lucas Arts troll all kinds of media looking for suspect violations, or in their case, future customers.
I had a co-worker once get around the sysadmin god's tracking systems (better known as the extortion system) by using a remote access system like VNC or PC Anywhere. Our company prohibits visiting restricted sites through the company network, but not through your own.
Maybe we should end the debate forever and have a mission to collect soil and bring it back to Earth for actual analysis. It would be hard to dispute physical evidence.
Nevermind the difficulties, but in order to proove it to some people I assume we would need actual evidence, especially to those who think life is unique to Earth (e.g. religious sector).
This is just another MPAA RIAA big brother tactic to try to make themselves look useful and possibly make some more money. Blocking client services like Gnutella and iMesh is difficult on any level within an ISP, primarily because it's just data flowing on a port. You can start by blocking specific ports, but this will be a game of catch the rabbit while users switch services, protocols become more intelligent, etc. Any ISP who is at all concerned with efficiency will quickly abandon these efforts.
The only way I could see ISPs finding out who is actually distributing copyrighted data would be to spy on users and look through data manually to find copyright violations. Of course, this would be a violation of several telecommunications laws. Using a file sharing system isn't illegal, and unlike Napster, many of these networks do not have a central source to go after.
It's also interesting to note Napster's community was its breaking point, because it gave unique usernames which could be tracked. In Gnutella's case, there is no clear way to track people. Specific networks could be tracked and IP addresses are available, but with DHCP those are pretty useless. It also raises the familiar point of placing IP addresses to real names (1 is easy, but imagine 100,000).
Hopefully the futility of all this will be realized. Napster was easy to get rid of, but now do these companies think every ISP will bend to their wills and censor communications and spy on the very people who provide the money to run their network?
Perhaps one day we will need confirmation that what we send is not copyrighted nor offends or violates any law or rule by any company with enough money to buy the pressure rights.
Linux can run on microwave ovens. In fact, you can run Linux in a 32 mm square chip. Haven't you heard of TiVo? Linux can run on more architectures than WinCE, in fact, it has less hardware requirements. So watch who you're bashing.
>Different markets. I am a professional software >engineer and need a PDA for my work while you >apparently need a really expensive version of a >color Game Boy. Besides, I have a gigahertz >Athlon with a 19" monitor, lots of RAM and hard >disk space, and a GeForce video card. Why would >I want to play outdated games on a slow handheld >with a tiny display and not much memory?
I'm a hardware engineer myself, and I choose PocketPC for its PC-like capabilities. I didn't want a glorified $32 pocket organizer. I like being able to have a full computer with me wherever I go, with the same footprint (give or tack a few ounces -- but this will change) as a Palm. Why get a greyscale organizer when I can have a full-color system. In the later, you can work plus do all the things a regular PC can do.
Since we're both professionals, I would assume cost isn't a big factor.
In YOUR own words, I can't believe this. Sleep is NOT cumulative as you jest. You cannot build up on sleep as you cannot require 28 hours of sleep.
Each person has a set amount of time for which they need to sleep. For most, it's around 8 hours. It doesn't matter if you have been up for three days or napped all day, you will still require the same amount of sleep each night for a good rest.
Your thinking is just the kind of thing that causes falling asleep at the wheel. I'm sure you probably think you can sleep all weekend and have this "stored up" for the busy work week. This just isn't so.
Your body is a clock, not a rechargable battery. You don't sleep to rest, you sleep because during this time certain chemicals are released which are required every night or set-time. The state of being tired is just a felling, like pain or hunger is. It's your bodies way of telling you something is wrong, and something needs to be done. And since the act of fullfilling your bodies request is pleasurable, you fall asleep, often at the wheel of your car.
But you cannot have a sleep "tab" or have "debts" as you claim.
Large ISPs have a lot more bandwidth than a few gigabytes. And as I mentioned, DoS has a lot to do with your ISP.
Of the several "ISPs" who were hosting servers, none actually owned the wire. This is because you are using the term ISP as Internet Service Provider, which can mean anything. Slashdot provides a service on the Internet, so they could also be considerd an ISP. However, the ISPs I am talking about provide bandwidth services and have actual public networks which are either national or global.
In affect, those hosting IRC have purchased services from a real telecommunications ISPs who operate public networks.
SolidStreaming is not an ISP, and in fact a traceroute shows they are using Globix.net as their hosting provider.
irc.emory.edu is obviously not an ISP, and they obviously lease a line from a company who could easily employ filtering at the router.
Even in the case a very large ISP would come under attack, it would be trivial to configure router interfaces to other connecting networks (both at these networks and at the ISP) in a similar way to block DoS. You only pay for bandwidth if you receive it, and if you ask a network to block certain types of packets, you will have eliminated your problem.
But perhaps the best method so far is good egress filtering at all network levels, especially in the cable and DSL networks who are often the target of DoS trojans and hacks. This would eliminate spoofed IP's and provide further protection from methods DoS attacks often use.
Please, do your homework (this doesn't count your MSCE study guide) before calling someone stupid.
Null routing a server due to DoS is just silly. Even with DDoS, it is very possible to block most all attacks, without costing bandwidth.
Our security policy when we go under a DDoS attack is to analyze the attack by collecting as much information as possible, and then configure router settings at our ISP to block the attack upstream, after it gets off the fat pipe and has less ability to cause network problems.
Most of the time we are dealing with script kiddies, albeit clever, they are no match in technical knowledge and most just click blindly at programs traded on IRC (ironically).
Even if the IP's are spoofed, they can still be filtered out, because the attack patterns of most all automated DDoS software, which uses cable modems and college networks are quite regular.
You should see grc.com for a good method of handeling a DDoS attack. This is what all administrators should do, but too many are trained that DoS is completly impossible and you are at the mercy of the "hackers" and the only thing you can do is run for the big red switch. This just isn't so.
These types of antics will be around for awhile, in all types of networks. There will be people who attack because someone banned them from IRC, people who do it because they're taking their personal problems out on the world, etc. The list goes on. If services, especially public, continue to wash their hands we will only see some great communities lost when a very good solution is always very easy to come by.
Most ISPs will work with users who are under DoS quite well. Remember, this is there network which is under attack too.
>Napster is nothing more than
>a pay-music service which
>tricks its users into supplying
>the bandwidth and content.
I find it ironic with all the comparisons of Napster going to the charge-for-content system. It would be funny if Slashdot would do the same.
In this case,/. would be tricking users into supplying the content (articles) and the community (comment posts). Since it never mirrors people it links to, it would also putting the bandwidth off as well.
Spatial Division Multiplexing is just another way of assigning specific areas to transfer data in parallel, instead of using a serial transfer method. It's basically dividing a space up into several channels.
I know you can do this in optics: for example, use only one part of an optic for a specific channel, etc. but since copper is conductive you can't define boundries, which is where I assume the cross talk correction comes in.
However, SDM is very inefficient for copper networks. A cousin, frequency division multiplexing, which is used in optical networks, DSL, cable networks (frequencies divided up into channels) is much better suited. Fiber uses it as well.
Time division multiplexing is also used, and on high capacity optical pipes DWDM systems are used which multiplex channels over several wavelengths, which can also 'layer' FDM and other modulation and frequency style methods to get even more bandwidth. A single optical fiber has as much bandwidth as the diffraction and interference limited wavelengths seperation times the data frequency. You could very easily fit all the world's Internet traffic onto a single fiber using a very sophisticated DWDM-FDM (with wavelength spacings at the physical limits). But then you need to be able to seperate each very close wavelength out, and demultiplex the several GHz modulation of each thereof (picosecond response, anyone?). Not to mention the generation which involves inverse problems of the same nature.
But as far as SDM on a copper line, this is defeating its own purpose. IMHO, its better to have a high clock and go up in bandwidth on the line. Copper can handle 100's of channels of UNCOMPRESSED video, just look at your cable system. Your cable modem can barely handle 2 Mbps, which is a far cry from raw NTSC. We aren't even using a fraction of that for gigabit networking fiber-over-CAT5 as it is.
This may be an interesting method, but it's a step back. It might be good if it can do it over all the ancient POTs stuff and go to consumers, but then again it relies on self-correcting cross talk and interference models, which can only be taken so far and are only ideal in *ideal* conditions.
What we really need is a good CAT5 going to every house providing all data services, and DWDM hubs to transfer and enable dedication and not bandwidth sharing. But as someone else mentioned, the telco's like to keep us in the dark ages, so they can milk out as much as they can from their nth generation system. They'll take it for as long as possible, before they're forced to get up and realize those research dollars back in the 1960s have long since been payed for.
Slashdot Mirror
Ogg Vorbis has a real chance of taking MP3, but they're going to have to change the name. Part of MP3's success is its trendy name. It's a smooth name that rolls of the tounge, sounds cool, but not too technical.
Ogg Vorbis sounds like a new brand of Mr. Clean. It's funny, strange, un-sophisticated and not natural to say. Personally, since both are technically about the same, I would prefer my files with a *.mp3 than *.ogg.
It's small, but it's something consumers notice. Fashion is just as important as functionality and political freedom.
I was shocked by this review site. Most all the graphs are misleading. Most magnify the area of differenc between the two processors to make the margin look larger. For example, in the benchmark "Content Creation Winstone" (http://www.systemlogic.net/reviews/hardware/proce ssors/intel/p41700/i/c7.gif), the difference is only 3.6 points, yet the scale is nearly 1/3. That's nearly 3x magnification.
Some only differ by a few percent, the lowest about -4.5% of P4 score, yet the distance represented on the graph would suggest nearly a 60% difference or more.
This review site needs to get a clue about statictics and start using proper graphing according to real differences, not magnified margins.
Somebody eating up a whole bunch of processing time to brute force cyptographic codes
...
Will the processing power be so immense that it won't fill up?
Yes. Even the most difficult of tasks won't use up *all* the bandwidth. And I'm sure the system will have some type of safe guards against extreme usage such as attempts to harm it, etc. We're talking about 500-1000 MHz * thousands, and lots of memory too.
I'm not sure I understand -- who provides this "grid"? Are they built and maintained by IBM around the world? I don't think IBM would be thrilled to discover that Compaq is using the IBM grid to advance Compaq's bottom line. I like IBM, don't get me wrong -- but I doubt they're such humanitarians.
Think Internet. Right now, we're paying for bandwidth, because the Internet is largely an information-only medium. However, in the future, we will also be able to have a certain amount of processing power, shared by everyone, used by everyone. IBM is just providing the structure (and at first the systems for the demo) to access mass computational resources. Soon, you will be able to access network wide applications which are processed on many machines across the network in a distributed way.
Right now we have an enormous processing surplus. Most machines sit unused for hours. Check your load averages if you don't believe me. Even a personal desktop used 8+ hours a day will barely break a few percent. Now imagine if we had some infrastructure, which is what IBM is aiming to do, to harness and unite all this power for general use? We would have an enormous amount of processing power available.
Is the "grid" made up of PCs on the Internet? First, most of those PCs are on dial-up connections, making things very complicated (and the PCs themselves not very useful). Second, who compensates the people who own the PCs? Is it strictly voluntary, like SETI@home? If so, how will anti-nuke activists prevent Los Alamos from running simulation calculations on their PowerMac?
Bandwidth will come in time. Even so, imagine having all of AOL's dialup connections available for processing. 56k isn't that much, but imagine millions of connections at once. As soon as we get lots of bandwidth and always-on connections wide-spread, this will be much easier. It's an upgrade path too. We can still start now and as people get faster connections and faster machines, the overall system power will increase.
As far as compensation, this is a public thing. We all use each other's resources, and we all contribute to the available processing resources. The sum of the parts of something are greater than one part alone, working alone. Similar to how Gnutella users each contribute and take, and why it works so well. Just translate the information into processing power. You can take as much or as little as you want, most people falling somewhere in between (this is how it always is and is a regular pattern).
I'm sure there are going to be leeches. But many people will want to share because they realize how the system works. Distributed systems like Gnutella do work (albeit a few leeches here and there), and this is proof that a processing system will also work.
I fear that the woman behind this, Charlene Gilbert, is going to turn it into some kind of personal vendetta and have it be another story about the white devil. She is already fused with black pride all through her story, and is clear in only one thing: revenge.
She seems more concerned with the fact someone wasn't payed than what have come from HeLa cells -- breakthroughs and cures in medical history.
You can see where this is going to based upon her prior film, about "black farmers and land loss since the Civil War," this will likely be the same tone: racially deviding and told with a slanted, pro-ethnic stance.
It's sad. Henrietta Lacks is a living legend who continues to live and help people even after death. I'm sure anyone would want to have the cure for polio and other diseases attributed to their name. I personally think it's disgusting to put money into this as this film-maker woman seems to want to do. We're talking about the human species here, not money or questions of racial black-white. This is much larger than trivial issues of that nature.
See:
d etail.cgi?collection=ce&atccNum=CCL-2
http://phage.atcc.org/cgi-bin/searchengine/direct
Only $167.00.
Could it be that this woman is the single largest human in the world with millions of her reproducing cells, even being sold on the Internet?
The direct link to the AT&T TTS research site (the group who developed this amazing TTS system) is here:
http://www.research.att.com/~mjm/cgi-bin/ttsdemo
We use this same system at work for our phone navigation system. Paired up with a natural language processor, it's quite easy to talk to as if a semi-sentient person. With a large phrase database, it's much more than an automated system.
I am glad AT&T is finally releasing a commercial product to the masses. I can't wait to get the developer version!
Why not just buy an IrDa cable and connect it up the pins on your motherboard? I bought one from HP, and it works great.
This is great news. Now lets see if they can actually turn a profit on the capital they've been given.
It's good to remember investors, not Linux users, control the market (and thus fate of companies). So go out there and support your software -- buy it!
I have to run Windows for some things, like, emm, Visual Studio for my work. The software for the product was also only supported under Windows. In any case, it's still bad form.
I visited the X10 site and bought the Remote DVD package. The product is good, but the marketing this company uses is down right ruthless and in some cases counter-productive toward customers.
Upon installing the support software, X10 overwrote all my shortcut icons (the little arrow which appears on all icons) with a tiny X-10 logo. It also changed my Windows Media Player title bar to say "Windows Media Player Provided By X10 Media Player". Also before previewing any movie files there is an X10 logo in the video, right before it begins playing.
And if that wasn't enough, they put their logo in the General section of System Properties, such as OEMs do. And yes, my bookmarks in both Navigatior and IE have all kinds of X10 links.
I uninstalled the software but this still didn't solve the problem. So I called the company and they said this is all in the license agreement. Well, I sent their product back and got my refund and used a registry editor to painfully remove all of the X10 brandings and subliminal messages.
It really makes me mad when a company thinks they have the right to mess with your system. And no, they haven't stopped e-mailing me promotional stuff even after I unsubscribed (didn't know I ever actual subscribed in the first place) from their mailing lists. I am also starting to get stuff in the mail now too.
For some pictures of the brandings, see:
http://root.27south.com/x10.html
I will never buy an X10 product again. Just shows how advertising can actually be bad.
I live in a lakeside community which has a large lake for paddle boating, duck feeding, etc. (no swimming). My friend moved here a few years ago, directly across the lake from my house. We used to do morse code messages to each other and soon we we're talking about wiring up a network together. One night we took a paddle boat out and layed an insulated CAT-5 directly across the lake, instead of going all the way around (would have used much more cable because it's kind of elliptical in shape).
The connection works great and now we have connected up three other neighboors as well. The most difficult part was getting the cable into the homes by drilling through wood and cement, but it wasn't that big of a deal. It's kind of cool -- and you don't even have to be a giant telecommunications company. Don't know if it's against our association rules, but I still enjoy my nightly Quake-over-lake game!
How about pigs? There are even more than cows.
Oink! Oink! BOOM!
You still didn't address exactly what it is. Why would I need security when browsing content? Why do I need 128 bit SSL with news headlines? What exactly is it that it does, besides be another web portal script?
This is typical Lucas Arts stuff. I recall watching a Dateline show or something about how the company has an entire department (rather large with 200 employees), of which is dedicated to trademark management of the Star Wars franchise. It turns out that the main profits in fact don't come from the original, unique work for which the trademark stands and is protected. Instead, it comes from lunch boxes, promotional contests, games fees, etc. This company actually has marketed its trademarks to a product level.
I would suspect the boys at Lucas Arts troll all kinds of media looking for suspect violations, or in their case, future customers.
I had a co-worker once get around the sysadmin god's tracking systems (better known as the extortion system) by using a remote access system like VNC or PC Anywhere. Our company prohibits visiting restricted sites through the company network, but not through your own.
Maybe we should end the debate forever and have a mission to collect soil and bring it back to Earth for actual analysis. It would be hard to dispute physical evidence.
Nevermind the difficulties, but in order to proove it to some people I assume we would need actual evidence, especially to those who think life is unique to Earth (e.g. religious sector).
Otherwise, it's just going to be another debate.
This is just another MPAA RIAA big brother tactic to try to make themselves look useful and possibly make some more money. Blocking client services like Gnutella and iMesh is difficult on any level within an ISP, primarily because it's just data flowing on a port. You can start by blocking specific ports, but this will be a game of catch the rabbit while users switch services, protocols become more intelligent, etc. Any ISP who is at all concerned with efficiency will quickly abandon these efforts.
The only way I could see ISPs finding out who is actually distributing copyrighted data would be to spy on users and look through data manually to find copyright violations. Of course, this would be a violation of several telecommunications laws. Using a file sharing system isn't illegal, and unlike Napster, many of these networks do not have a central source to go after.
It's also interesting to note Napster's community was its breaking point, because it gave unique usernames which could be tracked. In Gnutella's case, there is no clear way to track people. Specific networks could be tracked and IP addresses are available, but with DHCP those are pretty useless. It also raises the familiar point of placing IP addresses to real names (1 is easy, but imagine 100,000).
Hopefully the futility of all this will be realized. Napster was easy to get rid of, but now do these companies think every ISP will bend to their wills and censor communications and spy on the very people who provide the money to run their network?
Perhaps one day we will need confirmation that what we send is not copyrighted nor offends or violates any law or rule by any company with enough money to buy the pressure rights.
Linux can run on microwave ovens. In fact, you can run Linux in a 32 mm square chip. Haven't you heard of TiVo? Linux can run on more architectures than WinCE, in fact, it has less hardware requirements. So watch who you're bashing.
>Different markets. I am a professional software >engineer and need a PDA for my work while you >apparently need a really expensive version of a >color Game Boy. Besides, I have a gigahertz >Athlon with a 19" monitor, lots of RAM and hard >disk space, and a GeForce video card. Why would >I want to play outdated games on a slow handheld >with a tiny display and not much memory?
I'm a hardware engineer myself, and I choose PocketPC for its PC-like capabilities. I didn't want a glorified $32 pocket organizer. I like being able to have a full computer with me wherever I go, with the same footprint (give or tack a few ounces -- but this will change) as a Palm. Why get a greyscale organizer when I can have a full-color system. In the later, you can work plus do all the things a regular PC can do. Since we're both professionals, I would assume cost isn't a big factor.
In YOUR own words, I can't believe this. Sleep is NOT cumulative as you jest. You cannot build up on sleep as you cannot require 28 hours of sleep.
Each person has a set amount of time for which they need to sleep. For most, it's around 8 hours. It doesn't matter if you have been up for three days or napped all day, you will still require the same amount of sleep each night for a good rest.
Your thinking is just the kind of thing that causes falling asleep at the wheel. I'm sure you probably think you can sleep all weekend and have this "stored up" for the busy work week. This just isn't so.
Your body is a clock, not a rechargable battery. You don't sleep to rest, you sleep because during this time certain chemicals are released which are required every night or set-time. The state of being tired is just a felling, like pain or hunger is. It's your bodies way of telling you something is wrong, and something needs to be done. And since the act of fullfilling your bodies request is pleasurable, you fall asleep, often at the wheel of your car.
But you cannot have a sleep "tab" or have "debts" as you claim.
By the same account you could also say Linux is bloated because it runs on diverse architectures of hardware.
You can stay with your grey-scale palm while I go play Quake on my Pocket PC.
Large ISPs have a lot more bandwidth than a few gigabytes. And as I mentioned, DoS has a lot to do with your ISP.
Of the several "ISPs" who were hosting servers, none actually owned the wire. This is because you are using the term ISP as Internet Service Provider, which can mean anything. Slashdot provides a service on the Internet, so they could also be considerd an ISP. However, the ISPs I am talking about provide bandwidth services and have actual public networks which are either national or global.
In affect, those hosting IRC have purchased services from a real telecommunications ISPs who operate public networks.
SolidStreaming is not an ISP, and in fact a traceroute shows they are using Globix.net as their hosting provider.
irc.emory.edu is obviously not an ISP, and they obviously lease a line from a company who could easily employ filtering at the router.
Even in the case a very large ISP would come under attack, it would be trivial to configure router interfaces to other connecting networks (both at these networks and at the ISP) in a similar way to block DoS. You only pay for bandwidth if you receive it, and if you ask a network to block certain types of packets, you will have eliminated your problem.
But perhaps the best method so far is good egress filtering at all network levels, especially in the cable and DSL networks who are often the target of DoS trojans and hacks. This would eliminate spoofed IP's and provide further protection from methods DoS attacks often use.
Please, do your homework (this doesn't count your MSCE study guide) before calling someone stupid.
Null routing a server due to DoS is just silly. Even with DDoS, it is very possible to block most all attacks, without costing bandwidth.
Our security policy when we go under a DDoS attack is to analyze the attack by collecting as much information as possible, and then configure router settings at our ISP to block the attack upstream, after it gets off the fat pipe and has less ability to cause network problems.
Most of the time we are dealing with script kiddies, albeit clever, they are no match in technical knowledge and most just click blindly at programs traded on IRC (ironically).
Even if the IP's are spoofed, they can still be filtered out, because the attack patterns of most all automated DDoS software, which uses cable modems and college networks are quite regular.
You should see grc.com for a good method of handeling a DDoS attack. This is what all administrators should do, but too many are trained that DoS is completly impossible and you are at the mercy of the "hackers" and the only thing you can do is run for the big red switch. This just isn't so.
These types of antics will be around for awhile, in all types of networks. There will be people who attack because someone banned them from IRC, people who do it because they're taking their personal problems out on the world, etc. The list goes on. If services, especially public, continue to wash their hands we will only see some great communities lost when a very good solution is always very easy to come by.
Most ISPs will work with users who are under DoS quite well. Remember, this is there network which is under attack too.
>Napster is nothing more than >a pay-music service which >tricks its users into supplying >the bandwidth and content.
/. would be tricking users into supplying the content (articles) and the community (comment posts). Since it never mirrors people it links to, it would also putting the bandwidth off as well.
;-)
I find it ironic with all the comparisons of Napster going to the charge-for-content system. It would be funny if Slashdot would do the same.
In this case,
Nah, no similarities.
Spatial Division Multiplexing is just another way of assigning specific areas to transfer data in parallel, instead of using a serial transfer method. It's basically dividing a space up into several channels.
I know you can do this in optics: for example, use only one part of an optic for a specific channel, etc. but since copper is conductive you can't define boundries, which is where I assume the cross talk correction comes in.
However, SDM is very inefficient for copper networks. A cousin, frequency division multiplexing, which is used in optical networks, DSL, cable networks (frequencies divided up into channels) is much better suited. Fiber uses it as well.
Time division multiplexing is also used, and on high capacity optical pipes DWDM systems are used which multiplex channels over several wavelengths, which can also 'layer' FDM and other modulation and frequency style methods to get even more bandwidth. A single optical fiber has as much bandwidth as the diffraction and interference limited wavelengths seperation times the data frequency. You could very easily fit all the world's Internet traffic onto a single fiber using a very sophisticated DWDM-FDM (with wavelength spacings at the physical limits). But then you need to be able to seperate each very close wavelength out, and demultiplex the several GHz modulation of each thereof (picosecond response, anyone?). Not to mention the generation which involves inverse problems of the same nature.
But as far as SDM on a copper line, this is defeating its own purpose. IMHO, its better to have a high clock and go up in bandwidth on the line. Copper can handle 100's of channels of UNCOMPRESSED video, just look at your cable system. Your cable modem can barely handle 2 Mbps, which is a far cry from raw NTSC. We aren't even using a fraction of that for gigabit networking fiber-over-CAT5 as it is.
This may be an interesting method, but it's a step back. It might be good if it can do it over all the ancient POTs stuff and go to consumers, but then again it relies on self-correcting cross talk and interference models, which can only be taken so far and are only ideal in *ideal* conditions.
What we really need is a good CAT5 going to every house providing all data services, and DWDM hubs to transfer and enable dedication and not bandwidth sharing. But as someone else mentioned, the telco's like to keep us in the dark ages, so they can milk out as much as they can from their nth generation system. They'll take it for as long as possible, before they're forced to get up and realize those research dollars back in the 1960s have long since been payed for.