I'll have to agree with you, ReiserFS is the best.
I've a machine which clearly have a hardware problem that I haven't been able to resolve yet. I've been moving pieces of hardware to and from between two machines and I seem to end up with about two crashes a day no matter what I do.
At first I used ext3, and it didn't take long until I started to loose files; and lots of them. In the end I had to reinstall and this time I used ReiserFS. Of course the machine still crashes twice a day, but I haven't lost a single file; to my knowledge 8)
Every literate person know that this is a view that is maintained by catholics (even stated by the pope). The catholics have many missionaries. Those missionaries will, if they don't think for themselves, preach that birth control is wrong.
I think they extract this meaning from Onans untimely death caused by his reluctancy to make his dead brothers wife pregnant. And also to some degree Gods instruction to multiply and fill the earth.
There was/is probably license terms as you describe them on the RC5 client.
But this has nothing at to do with this case; it isn't distributed.net who is suing him.
The license term from distributed.net is only a precaution to prevent them from getting involved. Because of it they need only need to state that the user didn't use the client in accordance with their license terms.
In that case I would recommend HP-UX's old file system (HP-UX 9 and 10) when it comes to security.
Once I was to lazy to type 'make clean' and instead went for 'rm *.o' in my current directory. However I forgot the '.o'-part. I think it was just below half a second from the point where I clicked return to the point where my whole body was supported on the fingers clicking ctrl-c. Luckily the file system hadn't wiped out more that 10 of my source files and I was able to get them from an older archive.
Guess I would'nt have been that lucky with XFS 8)
"All suspects are guilty! Otherwise they wouldn't be suspects; would they?"
Well if you own all music you download you're off. They cannot hook you for anything.
It is one thing sharing or copying copyrighted material that you do not own the right to use. That is very clearly illegal and violates the rights of the artists (though I don't feel that sorry for them, they make to much money as it is). Creating the means that allows this copying on the other hand should not be illegal.
The way things work to day it seems that we drift towards abolishing products that could potentially be used for illegal purposes. I'd rather see that we go in the opposite direction and allow everything that could potentially be used for legal purposes as it is for most things (it is illegal, not impossible to break the law).
Another thing is that we seems to be forced towards caring for the bottom line of large companies or unions of companies (for example RIAA). It is not entirely fair that Napster should be responsible towards RIAA for the illegal actions of the napster users. I see a lot of other places where such care could come to better use. For example weapon producers could be made liable for the victims of their customers. But, generally I feel that the individual violater is and should be the sole responsible.
Now, it's just extortion (either you give me this, or we wont work).
Extortion? No, that is the free market. You are allowed to claim what you want for your labour. If you get what you want; now that is for the market to decide.
Of course if you see that the company can not afford to give you what you want then there is now reason to ask for it. Be happy with what you get or find a new job. But, this is for you to decide.
If you think that your superiors could have given you a larger share than you are getting you are free to go and ask for more. But, if they don't feel like giving you more, then you can just forget if you are making your claim alone.
Rackable too. Buy five; run three or four Enterprise Java Beans servers on each in a large cluster. You have just what you need fast and stable CPU and memory. Fast disks are reserved for database servers. Need to install more memory though.
Re:gotta say, it sounds promising...
on
Perl and .NET
·
· Score: 1
IMNSHO SOAP is really only created because of the troubles firewalls give IIOP (protocol of CORBA) and other non-HTTP protocols. It is really just a means to go around stale security arrangements. The XML-part is just included for the buzz-word compliancy.
BTW: Does anyone know if SOAP support copying object by value? In that case I guess I will not take long before we see RMI over SOAP (if Sun doesn't want to implement it, IBM will).
BTW2: Does anyone know whether Microsoft is using SOAP 1.1 or 1.2 for.NET. As I have understood 1.1 is still Microsoft proprietary.
Slashdot Mirror
I'll have to agree with you, ReiserFS is the best.
I've a machine which clearly have a hardware problem that I haven't been able to resolve yet. I've been moving pieces of hardware to and from between two machines and I seem to end up with about two crashes a day no matter what I do.
At first I used ext3, and it didn't take long until I started to loose files; and lots of them. In the end I had to reinstall and this time I used ReiserFS. Of course the machine still crashes twice a day, but I haven't lost a single file; to my knowledge 8)
no, it's a 12 letter word
3 times worse 8)
fobi
--
Then you should be sure to be awefully quiet when the bombs land in Afghanistan.
Every literate person know that this is a view that is maintained by catholics (even stated by the pope). The catholics have many missionaries. Those missionaries will, if they don't think for themselves, preach that birth control is wrong.
I think they extract this meaning from Onans untimely death caused by his reluctancy to make his dead brothers wife pregnant. And also to some degree Gods instruction to multiply and fill the earth.
There was/is probably license terms as you describe them on the RC5 client.
But this has nothing at to do with this case; it isn't distributed.net who is suing him.
The license term from distributed.net is only a precaution to prevent them from getting involved. Because of it they need only need to state that the user didn't use the client in accordance with their license terms.
Mod down the the parent, it isn't insightful.
In that case I would recommend HP-UX's old file system (HP-UX 9 and 10) when it comes to security.
Once I was to lazy to type 'make clean' and instead went for 'rm *.o' in my current directory. However I forgot the '.o'-part. I think it was just below half a second from the point where I clicked return to the point where my whole body was supported on the fingers clicking ctrl-c. Luckily the file system hadn't wiped out more that 10 of my source files and I was able to get them from an older archive.
Guess I would'nt have been that lucky with XFS 8)
"All suspects are guilty! Otherwise they wouldn't be suspects; would they?"
>And even if it were pixels, Schindler's List is mostly b/w, isn't it? I can remember some red, but blue? :-)
How would whe know? He is colour blind! 8)
Well if you own all music you download you're off. They cannot hook you for anything.
It is one thing sharing or copying copyrighted material that you do not own the right to use. That is very clearly illegal and violates the rights of the artists (though I don't feel that sorry for them, they make to much money as it is). Creating the means that allows this copying on the other hand should not be illegal.
The way things work to day it seems that we drift towards abolishing products that could potentially be used for illegal purposes. I'd rather see that we go in the opposite direction and allow everything that could potentially be used for legal purposes as it is for most things (it is illegal, not impossible to break the law).
Another thing is that we seems to be forced towards caring for the bottom line of large companies or unions of companies (for example RIAA). It is not entirely fair that Napster should be responsible towards RIAA for the illegal actions of the napster users. I see a lot of other places where such care could come to better use. For example weapon producers could be made liable for the victims of their customers. But, generally I feel that the individual violater is and should be the sole responsible.
BTW: I don't use napster.
Now, it's just extortion (either you give me this, or we wont work).
Extortion? No, that is the free market. You are allowed to claim what you want for your labour. If you get what you want; now that is for the market to decide.
Of course if you see that the company can not afford to give you what you want then there is now reason to ask for it. Be happy with what you get or find a new job. But, this is for you to decide.
If you think that your superiors could have given you a larger share than you are getting you are free to go and ask for more. But, if they don't feel like giving you more, then you can just forget if you are making your claim alone.
Excellent for application servers.
Rackable too. Buy five; run three or four Enterprise Java Beans servers on each in a large cluster. You have just what you need fast and stable CPU and memory. Fast disks are reserved for database servers. Need to install more memory though.
IMNSHO SOAP is really only created because of the troubles firewalls give IIOP (protocol of CORBA) and other non-HTTP protocols. It is really just a means to go around stale security arrangements. The XML-part is just included for the buzz-word compliancy. BTW: Does anyone know if SOAP support copying object by value? In that case I guess I will not take long before we see RMI over SOAP (if Sun doesn't want to implement it, IBM will). BTW2: Does anyone know whether Microsoft is using SOAP 1.1 or 1.2 for .NET. As I have understood 1.1 is still Microsoft proprietary.
so is OmniORB and TAO and Visigenic