And if lawmakers are to come up with adequate
responses to the lack of privacy online, they need
to fully understand the nature of the beast. In
short, if they read books, they
should read more Kafka and less Orwell.
For some reason this makes me think of Chris
Rock's intervention program. "I can read!".
Forget all the elitist comments about joe sixpack,
we need to make sure that politicians can read.
Or we could have Dubya toss my salad. I prefers
syrup.
Eidolon almost certainly forces a different way of thinking, but I don't think it's terribly foreign. In this case, the 'language' cannot exist outside of it's runtime, or context. In this way, it's similar to lisp, or scheme(I think). Conceivable one could write a Eidolon program in a regular text file and 'open'/'run'/'compile' it with the kernal, and be able to validate it in some sense.
That was my thought on playing with the test interface. People will make comparisons to
visual basic or code generators, but I think tcl
or scheme is a more apt comparison.
IMHO the "visual" part of this project is
intended to make the point that "code" is not
the "executable", and that the way we create and
build (and sometimes run) programs need not be
based on text. If visual modeling tools were not
already so popular they might have advocated
sound instead.
As an aside, their site is the first time I've run
across javadoc. Very, very, very cool. Might
be the thing that finally convinces me to learn
java.
To me this is not stagnation. It is more like the
feeling you have after a long bout with fever and
flu. A bit weak, but incredibly happy to not feel
like shit anymore.
Did anyone else think it was strange to have
strangers on the ski lift (or at the grocery
store, or wherever) ask you which stocks to
buy, just because you do "you know, computer
stuff"? The thought that seemingly rational
yuppies might want my investment advice shows
how stupid things were getting.
The real effect of the Craziness was to get
computers into all US middle-class homes. How
many people do you know who don't have email?
The hype and fear gave the computer/internet
combination essential tool status. People will
use those computers for something, and it wasn't
to buy petfood and groceries. BFD, next.
Despite the fact that the hype failed to reflect
reality a lot of infrastucture was built up very
quickly. Games, email, research, porn, hobbies,
web boards, IM/IRC chat, news. There are a lot of
talented and enthusiastic amateurs going in all
directions with all of the above.
So Leadbeater, et al. can have their new e-topia
without geeks. I imagine it will be as joyless
and over-hyped as the Craziness that is ending
in Our Internet.
Buh Bye vc. Don't let the door hit you on the way
out.
I'm not God's gift to Computing. I am G0d!!!
Stinking geezers. L1f3 Suxx0rs!!!
I work with lots of people younger than me, and I've never seen or heard the kind of crying and
bitching you predict. If those are your'e
experiences with younger people in computing, it
may be that you just bring out the best in people.
It seems to me that the
authors of this study are confused about the increasing
importance of external (but accesible) knowledge
and alarmed by the lapse in the teaching of foundation knowledge to young people, and have somehow connected the two together. Take the
way I use memory as an example.
The only items that PDAs replace for me are what
would formerly have gone in muscle-memory or on a
sticky note. I have very extreme problems with
short-term memory (thought to be a learning
disablity when I was younger). PDAs replace the need for memory tricks and obsessivly writing everything down.
In 3rd grade I was required to memorize
my multiplication tables to 20 * 20. Because I
have this foundation knowledge my method of
solving the sample problem is somewhat different
from yours. By simple doubling of 7 * 12,
then 7 * 24 (and the rest of the sample problem:
24 * 17) is trivial to do in my head, exactly as
it would be done on paper.
The more foundation knowldege you can have in your
head, the greater the range of how you can solve
a given problem. Even though I could construct a method to solve this particular problem (as you did), it is more workable for me to apply an already existing method (the pencil and paper way) and use knowledge already existing in my head.
By foundation knowledge of course I mean things like the alphabet, powers of 2, multiplication tables, common logs, stat bonuses from the D&D 1st edition rules, etc. Data and simple methods for producing data.
I have hundreds of books, MSDN library CDs, features in my editor, web documentation, etc. that contain knowledge external to me that I can access as needed. Who wants to remember the order of fields in a struct tm. Who remembers all the args and their order to every win32 API function.
I also have plenty of information in muscle-memory: Telephone numbers, passwords, greetings, commonly used commands, etc. but a lot of this is now on a PDA. This information is never
really possesed by me anyway. For example I have
to listen to myself say a phone number and write
it down to become aware of the contents of the
number.
I'll be interested to see replies to this troll
to see if it confirms my theory that the rise of
whore/trolling has incurred the death of character
in modern trolling.
I remember when I was a child
reading such classic trolls as
l33t j0e, Shoeboy, dmg, and that Penis Bird Guy.
Those trolls were lovingly handcrafted by sarcastic,
hateful people, looking to piss you off.
Nowadays, I feel that KTB has removed the
character, if not perhaps the personality, of
slashdot trolling. With the ease for uninformed
slashbots to mod up a whore/troll that
slashdot
brings, doesn't the ease bring a certain lack of
attention to detail?
I just feel that modern whore/trolls, such as
KTB and the like, lack the interest of the old,
and have a patina of artificiality. Some would say
that this is because of soulless modern
karma market, and this may be true, but it is
also, IMO, due [1] to the very techniques used
in modern trolling.
There is also a framework draft at the ietf impp wg page.
If the FCC were to solicit comment from the Internet
community they might realize that AIM is nothing
special, and is merely a security bug-ridden piece
of crapware. But since the Internet community
mostly [1]
consists of noise making morons they will
not bother asking.
2^32 = plenty. More than enough.
2^128 = loads. Way more than enough.
My comment about the raw numbers involved in ipv4 vs ipv6 are intended to show that the raw numbers are pretty meaningless. ipv6 makes provisions for site-local addresses and ipv4 compat address space. I'm assuming that most ip-enabled bake-ovens will go in site-local, maybe with a public facing control system.
...
your arguement might hold up for DNS, but not routing. when people talk about dumb vs. inteligent networks, do you think they're talking about the wires? it's routers, switches and other network equipment that have that "inteligence" or not. and they clearly have some - like the routing info.
When routers and switches are moving packets they
are dumb, route lookup could be handled by a spring-driven mechanical switch. Populating the routing table is a distinct function from forwarding a packet. Calulating a spanning-tree is not frame switching.
These functions can be performed on systems other than the router or switch doing the forwarding.
...
to which i agree entirely. another reason e2e doesn't make sense. i should be able to design my network any way i like, you should be able to design yours any way you like. it should then be up to us to provide for inter-connectivity.
You can set up your network in any way you see fit. Just follow the standards and no one gets hurt. Routers and switches mangling packets and lying to the other end of the connection will often break those standards. Troubleshooting such problems will make you look like a stud and teach you to curse like a sailor, but there is nothing else to recomend them.
When those standards are broken by the an intermediate system deciding to snoop higher layers, then there is a fault at that system. It is
not the duty of designers of the widget control protocol to learn how to interoperate with every router, switch, or firewall out there.
End-to-End requirements are not some holy thing that ip geeks love because some standards body
says to. People argue for it because it works.
e2e purity is not the point, but gratuitous incompatability often result when it is broken without extreme care.
There are many cases were the area code or actual digits dialed do not determine if the call is long distance or not.
A common case is where a LEC (*Bell) or large established CLEC (GTE) has an extended local calling area agreement with small rural cariers. The confusion arises when calls are
placed onto the networks of CLECs in large urban areas who do not have agreements with rural carriers. The rural carriers will charge their users long distance or not depending on who owns the called number.
The real issue that people seem to have is not that an additional 3 digits is hard to remember, but that people are used to dialling 11 digits (starting with 1) for long distance.
Something better might be a notification tone to users letting them know when they have dialled a number that is non-local and billable. Those who unaware they were about to dial a toll call could then disconnect.
Wow, you are wrong in so many ways I can't even think of a place to start. Knock my sacred cow will you.
that's right, that info (inteligence) comes from the network - switches, routers, DNS servers, and the like. a common counter is "DNS isn't an application" but to the network, it is. it's just transferring bits around. so's routing. but the inteligence that makes it work lives in the network, not on the edge (my host).
Nope, it (the intelligence) comes from other endpoints. Not your host, my host, but still an endpoint.
Routing tables are simple and run by very simple rules.
Routing protocols and DNS are a little more complex, but exist at endpoints. They are applications, not transport.
IPv6 doesn't solve this, it just pushes the problem farther out into the future. if, as many people have suggested, my toaster, car, telephone, TV, and socks will all have IP addresses one day, even the new addresses provided by IPv6 won't last very long.
2^32 = plenty. More than enough.
2^128 = loads. Way more than enough.
The problems with ipv4 do not involve the number of nodes, it is a lack of management and arguably
managability of the address space an org is allocated.
I'm sure you're experiences with NAT all involve you home or campus network. NAT sucks a lot more in the real world than it does in such environments.
The only use for QoS is as a competetive marketing tool.
How many useful applications are there for QoS? I'll give you a hint, its illegal to divide by this number, the Arab world ivented it, it is the default post level of an AC.
The current internet sucks and is getting worse. I'd suggest no one use it.
Slashdot Mirror
And if lawmakers are to come up with adequate responses to the lack of privacy online, they need to fully understand the nature of the beast. In short, if they read books, they should read more Kafka and less Orwell.
For some reason this makes me think of Chris Rock's intervention program. "I can read!".
Forget all the elitist comments about joe sixpack, we need to make sure that politicians can read. Or we could have Dubya toss my salad. I prefers syrup.
--
That was my thought on playing with the test interface. People will make comparisons to visual basic or code generators, but I think tcl or scheme is a more apt comparison.
IMHO the "visual" part of this project is intended to make the point that "code" is not the "executable", and that the way we create and build (and sometimes run) programs need not be based on text. If visual modeling tools were not already so popular they might have advocated sound instead.
As an aside, their site is the first time I've run across javadoc. Very, very, very cool. Might be the thing that finally convinces me to learn java.
--
No. My apartment caught fire when I tried.
--
Did anyone else think it was strange to have strangers on the ski lift (or at the grocery store, or wherever) ask you which stocks to buy, just because you do "you know, computer stuff"? The thought that seemingly rational yuppies might want my investment advice shows how stupid things were getting.
The real effect of the Craziness was to get computers into all US middle-class homes. How many people do you know who don't have email? The hype and fear gave the computer/internet combination essential tool status. People will use those computers for something, and it wasn't to buy petfood and groceries. BFD, next.
Despite the fact that the hype failed to reflect reality a lot of infrastucture was built up very quickly. Games, email, research, porn, hobbies, web boards, IM/IRC chat, news. There are a lot of talented and enthusiastic amateurs going in all directions with all of the above.
So Leadbeater, et al. can have their new e-topia without geeks. I imagine it will be as joyless and over-hyped as the Craziness that is ending in Our Internet.
Buh Bye vc. Don't let the door hit you on the way out.
--
I'm not God's gift to Computing. I am G0d!!! Stinking geezers. L1f3 Suxx0rs!!!
I work with lots of people younger than me, and I've never seen or heard the kind of crying and bitching you predict. If those are your'e experiences with younger people in computing, it may be that you just bring out the best in people.
(smiley face)
--
In 3rd grade I was required to memorize my multiplication tables to 20 * 20. Because I have this foundation knowledge my method of solving the sample problem is somewhat different from yours. By simple doubling of 7 * 12, then 7 * 24 (and the rest of the sample problem: 24 * 17) is trivial to do in my head, exactly as it would be done on paper.
The more foundation knowldege you can have in your head, the greater the range of how you can solve a given problem. Even though I could construct a method to solve this particular problem (as you did), it is more workable for me to apply an already existing method (the pencil and paper way) and use knowledge already existing in my head.
By foundation knowledge of course I mean things like the alphabet, powers of 2, multiplication tables, common logs, stat bonuses from the D&D 1st edition rules, etc. Data and simple methods for producing data.
I have hundreds of books, MSDN library CDs, features in my editor, web documentation, etc. that contain knowledge external to me that I can access as needed. Who wants to remember the order of fields in a struct tm. Who remembers all the args and their order to every win32 API function.
I also have plenty of information in muscle-memory: Telephone numbers, passwords, greetings, commonly used commands, etc. but a lot of this is now on a PDA. This information is never really possesed by me anyway. For example I have to listen to myself say a phone number and write it down to become aware of the contents of the number.
--
- Hot Grits Markup Language
- Bill Gates struts his pasty white ass on
goatse.cx
- goatse.cx goes commercial selling RealGoat(tm)
- goatse.cx shows up on fuckedcompany.com
- Everyone but me is a robot
- New aalib has setting to
beat the lameness filter!
I hate you guys. Happy new year.--
I remember when I was a child reading such classic trolls as l33t j0e, Shoeboy, dmg, and that Penis Bird Guy. Those trolls were lovingly handcrafted by sarcastic, hateful people, looking to piss you off.
Nowadays, I feel that KTB has removed the character, if not perhaps the personality, of slashdot trolling. With the ease for uninformed slashbots to mod up a whore/troll that slashdot brings, doesn't the ease bring a certain lack of attention to detail?
I just feel that modern whore/trolls, such as KTB and the like, lack the interest of the old, and have a patina of artificiality. Some would say that this is because of soulless modern karma market, and this may be true, but it is also, IMO, due [1] to the very techniques used in modern trolling.
Give me old-fashioned goatse ascii art any time.
[1] sue
--
There is also a framework draft at the ietf impp wg page.
If the FCC were to solicit comment from the Internet community they might realize that AIM is nothing special, and is merely a security bug-ridden piece of crapware. But since the Internet community mostly [1] consists of noise making morons they will not bother asking.
[1] mostly
--
My comment about the raw numbers involved in ipv4 vs ipv6 are intended to show that the raw numbers are pretty meaningless. ipv6 makes provisions for site-local addresses and ipv4 compat address space. I'm assuming that most ip-enabled bake-ovens will go in site-local, maybe with a public facing control system.
your arguement might hold up for DNS, but not routing. when people talk about dumb vs. inteligent networks, do you think they're talking about the wires? it's routers, switches and other network equipment that have that "inteligence" or not. and they clearly have some - like the routing info.
When routers and switches are moving packets they are dumb, route lookup could be handled by a spring-driven mechanical switch. Populating the routing table is a distinct function from forwarding a packet. Calulating a spanning-tree is not frame switching. These functions can be performed on systems other than the router or switch doing the forwarding.
to which i agree entirely. another reason e2e doesn't make sense. i should be able to design my network any way i like, you should be able to design yours any way you like. it should then be up to us to provide for inter-connectivity.
You can set up your network in any way you see fit. Just follow the standards and no one gets hurt. Routers and switches mangling packets and lying to the other end of the connection will often break those standards. Troubleshooting such problems will make you look like a stud and teach you to curse like a sailor, but there is nothing else to recomend them.
When those standards are broken by the an intermediate system deciding to snoop higher layers, then there is a fault at that system. It is not the duty of designers of the widget control protocol to learn how to interoperate with every router, switch, or firewall out there.
End-to-End requirements are not some holy thing that ip geeks love because some standards body says to. People argue for it because it works. e2e purity is not the point, but gratuitous incompatability often result when it is broken without extreme care.
--
A common case is where a LEC (*Bell) or large established CLEC (GTE) has an extended local calling area agreement with small rural cariers. The confusion arises when calls are placed onto the networks of CLECs in large urban areas who do not have agreements with rural carriers. The rural carriers will charge their users long distance or not depending on who owns the called number.
The real issue that people seem to have is not that an additional 3 digits is hard to remember, but that people are used to dialling 11 digits (starting with 1) for long distance.
Something better might be a notification tone to users letting them know when they have dialled a number that is non-local and billable. Those who unaware they were about to dial a toll call could then disconnect.
--
You need to update your hot grits link
--
that's right, that info (inteligence) comes from the network - switches, routers, DNS servers, and the like. a common counter is "DNS isn't an application" but to the network, it is. it's just transferring bits around. so's routing. but the inteligence that makes it work lives in the network, not on the edge (my host).
Nope, it (the intelligence) comes from other endpoints. Not your host, my host, but still an endpoint.
Routing tables are simple and run by very simple rules. Routing protocols and DNS are a little more complex, but exist at endpoints. They are applications, not transport.
IPv6 doesn't solve this, it just pushes the problem farther out into the future. if, as many people have suggested, my toaster, car, telephone, TV, and socks will all have IP addresses one day, even the new addresses provided by IPv6 won't last very long.
2^32 = plenty. More than enough.
2^128 = loads. Way more than enough.
The problems with ipv4 do not involve the number of nodes, it is a lack of management and arguably managability of the address space an org is allocated.
I'm sure you're experiences with NAT all involve you home or campus network. NAT sucks a lot more in the real world than it does in such environments.
--
How many useful applications are there for QoS? I'll give you a hint, its illegal to divide by this number, the Arab world ivented it, it is the default post level of an AC.
The current internet sucks and is getting worse. I'd suggest no one use it.
--