I don't know if I'm going to love today or hate it with a passion- the pranks this year seem to be taking on a ludicrous edge to them or an unduly aggressive edge to them.
Today's not going to be a useful day, information-wise, in any case...
They took a bunch of riot footage from something like CNN and edited in the "Linuxhead" touches to it- worse, they did a sloppy job of it, as it looked edited in with something like GIMP or Photoshop.
That'd explain the Deathstar refs equally as well. Problem is, it'd be giving Lucas' companies an UGLY black eye, PR-wise with us as much as MS doing the deed would- one of the market segments they DON'T want pissed at them with the release of the movie so close would be VERY pissed off at them (I know I would be!). The net's been a large dynamic in the PR and marketing of thier latest, soon to be released, film- attacking several of the more popular sites visited by that market segment's tantamount to suicide.
Their stories sort of match up- give you ONE guess as to WHOM since Illiad oopsed and dropped a subtle hint as to whom was persecuting them. You'd think they'd leave well enough alone considering that their PR is not anywhere NEAR the high point. The use of parody and names within the same is allowed by law- if the company pursues this little action any further than they have SegFault AND User Friendly have grounds for harassment and the damages, whoo...
What is a good comment? What is bad? Well, its hard to tell. It's ambigious and up to the whims of a given moderator. But we've tried to createa system that will keep everyone in check.
Messages can largely be grouped into three catagories.
1.Good messages that are insightful, well written, and add value to the article they are attached to. (Score: > 1)
2.Average messages might be slightly offtopic, but still might be worth reading. They might be redundant. They might be a 'Me Too' article. They might say something painfully obvious. They don't detract from the discussion, but they don't necessarily significantly add to it. They are the comments that require the most attention from the moderators, and they also represent the bulk of the comments. (Score: 0-1)
3.Bad Comments are flamebait. Bad comments have nothing to do with the article they are attached to. They call somone names. They ridicule someone for having a different opinion without backing it up with anything more tangible than strong words. Bad comments are repeats of something said 15 times already making it quite apparent that the writer didn't read the previous comments. They use foul language. They are hard to read or just don't make any sense. They detract from the article they are attached to.
Now, having said this, I'll say that I've shown the respect and consideration that is due to the rest of/. by me when I was promoted to moderator- that is, I've largely left things alone. Why? Because most of the posts don't need moderation. I'm not entirely sure what's going on in my fellow moderator's heads, but it's not all in keeping with the above criteria. I had a simple post that was a one-liner yesterday about the topic being just more FUD from ZDNet- and it got moderated almost immediately to -2. My only thought is that they wasted several of their points (either collectively or as a single individual) to mask out something that was neither offensive, inflamatory, etc. The post was, per the criteria, in the second class- I won't argue that, but someone was so "bothered" by it that they hammered the post below the normal threshold as if it fit into the third category. Got to wonder about these goings on...
If you deploy it in an application, it costs on a per user or per transaction basis. It would be prohibitively expensive for him to use it unless Larry (or one of his underlings) decided it would be good PR and an even better test of Oracle on Linux to have Rob use a "free" license.
"p.s. how many of you -can- make a flaky Linux installation if you want to? I can -- compile the kernel with -O6, agressive strength-reduction etc."
A trained monkey could do the same thing as you just described at any corporation you could name. Nobody in their right mind would do that- and that doesn't constitute "fickle" or capricious. To attribute what you just claimed to that is intellectual laziness on the part of the claimee.
However, having said that, I will agree to some extent that this is all due to a percieved fickleness to the OS. Something we're going to have to work on for IBM.
Transactions are a different beastie. And I can assure you that there are *VERY* few million transaction sites out there. Is this database transactions? If so, I suspect/. and others could and DO scale to this level nicely already. If you're talking financial transactions, then there are really NO sites like that on the Web. Why do I claim this? At a US dollar per transaction, a million transactions are a million dollars. Now, each of these transactions that happen, just so happen to be a lot more than that. Does anyone honestly think that any of these sites, like Amazon, rake in much more than $500-750k per day? I sure don't. Don't base opinions of how an e-commerce site will fare with what goes on here on/. First of all, changes would be thoroughly tested out on a staging server before even being deployed on an e-commerce site. Second, they'd be fielding a hell of a lot more hardware than Rob's tossing at it. Third, they would have more admin staff than/. has. Fourth, they'd be using someone like InterNAP to guarantee bandwidth- much of the slowdowns we see when the site's under load isn't in Rob's immediate pipe, it's the fact that he's on only ONE backbone (Amazon and many other high-volume e-commerce sites use InterNAP because they don't use their own backbone, they use the big-8's and route accordingly to avoid MAE-East and MAE-West 90-95% of the time.).
They got slashdotted pretty damn quick- about 10 or so minutes- anyone got access to set up mirrors (or does the licensing of the beta disallow that sort of distribution?)?
After your review of ST:Insurrection, I wonder if I should listen to your movie reviews. After all, had you paid attention to the plot a little closer, you'd have caught a lot of the explanation of the goings on that offended you. It wasn't anywhere near as bad as you made it out to be. Perhaps I'm more generous than you are with movies- but, I'll reserve judgement on Wing Commander (just like I did for Insurrection).
Loki and Activision have said as much- this was a last minute decision to make a Linux version so it's going to take a couple of months for the Linux version to hit the shelves. Say by around June or so we should already HAVE it in all our hot little hands...
With the congestion at the public network access points that this will obviously cause, you're likely as not to NOT connect to much of anything except sites on your own backbone.
You see, you aren't making apples to apples comparisions here with the CPUs. First off, there's cache and bus speed differences- and the PII is going to win out. Also, realize you won't see as much speed out of that second processor as you'd think, it's not double- it's more like 80-90% of double the speed (all the admin overhead of the SMP operation).
In all honesty, the only time you want SMP is if you're doing a server of any kind and the pricing on CPUs makes it so that you end up with a machine that is as fast or faster for less. A good example would be the web server I just set up for my employer. The price breaks for 2 PII 350's were better than for one 400 or 450 in the machine(as in it cost us the same as a single 450 would have!)- so it made a lot of sense to do it as an SMP box (Something on the order of 600Mhz performance overall on compiles and actual server operation...)
Rumor has it that it's going to be an option on most of the Business systems and possibly some of the intended for home/SOHO machines as well- you and I aren't going to know until they do start shipping the machines. However, I DO know that they are, in fact, going to be shipping machines- very shortly.
Doubt all you want- THIS IS REALLY HAPPENING. I know it for a fact- the delay at this point is retooling the custom, build to order, software installation system they use to allow them to build Linux installs on boxes.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know if I'm going to love today or hate it with a passion- the pranks this year seem to be taking on a ludicrous edge to them or an unduly aggressive edge to them.
Today's not going to be a useful day, information-wise, in any case...
Wouldn't be the same again- wouldn't be remotely believable for the regulars that have been reading /. since it's beginnings...
A post that is intelligent and pertinent from the Inglorious MEEPT!!? I'd have said it impossible until after seeing this post from you.
It's a poor attempt at an April Fool's...
They took a bunch of riot footage from something like CNN and edited in the "Linuxhead" touches to it- worse, they did a sloppy job of it, as it looked edited in with something like GIMP or Photoshop.
Don't waste your time on this one.
Ouch...
That'd explain the Deathstar refs equally as well. Problem is, it'd be giving Lucas' companies an UGLY black eye, PR-wise with us as much as MS doing the deed would- one of the market segments they DON'T want pissed at them with the release of the movie so close would be VERY pissed off at them (I know I would be!). The net's been a large dynamic in the PR and marketing of thier latest, soon to be released, film- attacking several of the more popular sites visited by that market segment's tantamount to suicide.
Their stories sort of match up- give you ONE guess as to WHOM since Illiad oopsed and dropped a subtle hint as to whom was persecuting them. You'd think they'd leave well enough alone considering that their PR is not anywhere NEAR the high point. The use of parody and names within the same is allowed by law- if the company pursues this little action any further than they have SegFault AND User Friendly have grounds for harassment and the damages, whoo...
That would imply they had any to begin with...
I just got this new toy and I've not (ab)used it yet. ;-)
I was just quoting from the guidelines Rob handed us.
What is what?
/. by me when I was promoted to moderator- that is, I've largely left things alone. Why? Because most of the posts don't need moderation. I'm not entirely sure what's going on in my fellow moderator's heads, but it's not all in keeping with the above criteria. I had a simple post that was a one-liner yesterday about the topic being just more FUD from ZDNet- and it got moderated almost immediately to -2. My only thought is that they wasted several of their points (either collectively or as a single individual) to mask out something that was neither offensive, inflamatory, etc. The post was, per the criteria, in the second class- I won't argue that, but someone was so "bothered" by it that they hammered the post below the normal threshold as if it fit into the third category. Got to wonder about these goings on...
What is a good comment? What is bad? Well, its hard to tell. It's ambigious and up to the whims of a given moderator. But we've tried to createa system that will keep everyone in check.
Messages can largely be grouped into three catagories.
1.Good messages that are insightful, well written, and add value to the article they are attached to. (Score: > 1)
2.Average messages might be slightly offtopic, but still might be worth reading. They might be redundant. They might be a 'Me Too' article. They might say something painfully obvious. They don't detract from the discussion, but they don't necessarily significantly add to it. They are the comments that require the most attention from the moderators, and they also represent the bulk of the comments. (Score: 0-1)
3.Bad Comments are flamebait. Bad comments have nothing to do with the article they are attached to. They call somone names. They ridicule someone for having a different opinion without backing it up with anything more tangible than strong words. Bad comments are repeats of something said 15 times already making it quite apparent that the writer didn't read the previous comments. They use foul language. They are hard to read or just don't make any sense. They detract from the article they are attached to.
Now, having said this, I'll say that I've shown the respect and consideration that is due to the rest of
They're going to run out of points at some point and they're going to have to post a LOT of comments to get more of them.
If you deploy it in an application, it costs on a per user or per transaction basis. It would be prohibitively expensive for him to use it unless Larry (or one of his underlings) decided it would be good PR and an even better test of Oracle on Linux to have Rob use a "free" license.
"p.s. how many of you -can- make a flaky Linux installation if you want to? I can -- compile the kernel with -O6, agressive strength-reduction etc."
A trained monkey could do the same thing as you just described at any corporation you could name. Nobody in their right mind would do that- and that doesn't constitute "fickle" or capricious. To attribute what you just claimed to that is intellectual laziness on the part of the claimee.
However, having said that, I will agree to some extent that this is all due to a percieved fickleness to the OS. Something we're going to have to work on for IBM.
Transactions are a different beastie. And I can assure you that there are *VERY* few million transaction sites out there. Is this database transactions? If so, I suspect /. and others could and DO scale to this level nicely already. If you're talking financial transactions, then there are really NO sites like that on the Web. Why do I claim this? At a US dollar per transaction, a million transactions are a million dollars. Now, each of these transactions that happen, just so happen to be a lot more than that. Does anyone honestly think that any of these sites, like Amazon, rake in much more than $500-750k per day? I sure don't. Don't base opinions of how an e-commerce site will fare with what goes on here on /. First of all, changes would be thoroughly tested out on a staging server before even being deployed on an e-commerce site. Second, they'd be fielding a hell of a lot more hardware than Rob's tossing at it. Third, they would have more admin staff than /. has. Fourth, they'd be using someone like InterNAP to guarantee bandwidth- much of the slowdowns we see when the site's under load isn't in Rob's immediate pipe, it's the fact that he's on only ONE backbone (Amazon and many other high-volume e-commerce sites use InterNAP because they don't use their own backbone, they use the big-8's and route accordingly to avoid MAE-East and MAE-West 90-95% of the time.).
Nobody wants to touch it with a ten foot pole- the patent licensing is so onerous nobody wants to go that route.
They got slashdotted pretty damn quick- about 10 or so minutes- anyone got access to set up mirrors (or does the licensing of the beta disallow that sort of distribution?)?
After your review of ST:Insurrection, I wonder if I should listen to your movie reviews. After all, had you paid attention to the plot a little closer, you'd have caught a lot of the explanation of the goings on that offended you. It wasn't anywhere near as bad as you made it out to be. Perhaps I'm more generous than you are with movies- but, I'll reserve judgement on Wing Commander (just like I did for Insurrection).
Guess I'll have to wait until it ships now... ;->
Loki and Activision have said as much- this was a last minute decision to make a Linux version so it's going to take a couple of months for the Linux version to hit the shelves. Say by around June or so we should already HAVE it in all our hot little hands...
They're showing signs of ALL of those...
A: His lips are moving...
Red Hat's IS.
With the congestion at the public network access points that this will obviously cause, you're likely as not to NOT connect to much of anything except sites on your own backbone.
You see, you aren't making apples to apples comparisions here with the CPUs. First off, there's cache and bus speed differences- and the PII is going to win out. Also, realize you won't see as much speed out of that second processor as you'd think, it's not double- it's more like 80-90% of double the speed (all the admin overhead of the SMP operation).
In all honesty, the only time you want SMP is if you're doing a server of any kind and the pricing on CPUs makes it so that you end up with a machine that is as fast or faster for less. A good example would be the web server I just set up for my employer. The price breaks for 2 PII 350's were better than for one 400 or 450 in the machine(as in it cost us the same as a single 450 would have!)- so it made a lot of sense to do it as an SMP box (Something on the order of 600Mhz performance overall on compiles and actual server operation...)
Rumor has it that it's going to be an option on most of the Business systems and possibly some of the intended for home/SOHO machines as well- you and I aren't going to know until they do start shipping the machines. However, I DO know that they are, in fact, going to be shipping machines- very shortly.
Doubt all you want- THIS IS REALLY HAPPENING. I know it for a fact- the delay at this point is retooling the custom, build to order, software installation system they use to allow them to build Linux installs on boxes.