What you say is absolutely true. I never said they don't provide source;-)
The problem is that we've got a commercial operating system that depends on GNU software.
This is different from a *BSD or MacOS X where GNU only shows up in the development tools... in BeOS, the OS will not even run without the presence of GNU software.
See paragraph 2.b of version 2.0 of the GPL: You must cause any work that you distribute or publish, that in whole or in part contains or is derived from the Program or any part thereof, to be licensed as a whole at no charge to all third parties under the terms of this License.
Depending on how you interpret that, BeOS violates the GPL. The FSF has been letting it slide. I'm a *huge* BeOS fan and I've always felt a little uneasy knowing that BeOS is skating on thin legal ice.
After BeOS was ported to x86 they were still moving along pretty well.
The second big mistake they made was the damn "focus shift" to internet appliances, where they dumped BeOS and alienated the customers and developers. You can blame Sakoman as well as Gassee for that brillant move.
Yeah, that's about the one thing Net+ does best. You've got a lightweight browser running on a very snappy GUI, *no* javascript, etc.
There are other little niceties too, like being able to middle click to open in a new window, being able to alias sucky.doubleclick.ads.com to 127.0.0.1, etc.
The last unreleased version of NetPositive was 2.2.2. It's basically version 2.2.1 but with OpenSSL instead of RSA crypto. That way you can *pay* for pr0n and watch it all with the same browser:-P
BeOS has always been on thin ice in regards to licensing.
The operating system depends on Bourne shell scripts. BeOS comes with its own version of bash, but it's modified. BeOS also has a decent collection of the usual GNU fileutils and stuff like that, of course.
The critical difference with bash, however, is that without that piece of GNU software the operating system would not work. The FSF hasn't ever pursued it, probably because it seemed like a gray area and Be wasn't really a major player.
" . . . person could recover the master key in two weeks given four standard PCs and fifty HDCP displays . . . a textbook example of a cryptographic attack."
Bravo. Sounds like Niels Furgeson really worked on it and come up with legitimate break. This kind of hard work and perseverance should be applauded. His craft is worth of respect.
However, Cryptology has never been something that you can partake in out in the open in full view of the world. I don't blame Niels for not wanting to publish.
Imagine Alan Turing announcing in 1940s "look guys, I figured out how to break those German enigma machines!" Whoops. Treason. You lose. Capital punishment, etc. And there wouldn't even have been a public trial.
In this case though, we're just dealing with commercial video appliances rather than military comms. We're only dealing with Intel and their DMCA-buddies, not the Axis. Niels Furgeson isn't at risk of becoming an unperson if he publishes a a break against HDCP, but there are real-life risks involved. The corporations involved do not play nice. There are many parties involved, vested interests, many millions of dollars at stake. I wish we lived in a world where Niels could publish and not have to worry.
He simply gave a presentation in Las Vegas, Nevada. Any person, whether they're a foreigner or a U.S. Citizen, is protected by the First Amendment when giving presentations in Las Vegas.
The scary thing is that the Slashdot story says "Adobe was apparently responsible for the arrest". Corporations should NEVER be permitted to have that much power! What kind of fucked up world do we live in where a private company can dictate whether someone can live free or go to jail?
Actually, if you listen carefully on very high quality equipment, you can hear the difference between 256Kps MP3 and a CD.
Read Scot Hacker's livejournal entry about performing just such a test. Yes, he's the same Scot hacker who wrote the O'Reilly book on MP3;-) Part of the entry follows below:  l I counter that by saying that the difference b/w 256kbps and WAV is so incredibly subtle, and 320kbps would be virtually indistinguishable in every important way. You still get around 4x compression at 320kbps, and you have the advantage of ID3 tags. Why not take advantage of it?
I could tell there was a difference between the 256 and the WAV in the Wasserman duet/vocal, but had trouble putting my finger on the difference. Mike nailed it down, and had me focus on the spatial relationship or distance between the vocalist near the middle of the room and the cello in the rear left of the room. At 256kbps, there is a sort of "veil" that enshrouds the vocals, and ties it spatially to the cellist in the rear left. It's subtle, but he's right - the spatial distinction between them is just not as pronounced at 256kbps as it is with the WAV.
I've always heard that when running FreeBSD on alpha, it's better to use DEC's (err, Compaq's) compiler instead of gcc. Some folks in the local FreeBSD group here said for compiling serious scientific number crunching apps, the DEC compiler generated much faster running apps.
I dunno which one actually compiled faster, though.
For a start, instruction ordering etc. for a RISC chip, even for not really optimised code can take far more processing time. Then, if you add optimisation, which in a RISC architecture is a FAR more complex task. All this means is that compiling on a RISC architecture is bound to be a great deal slower.
I'd have to agree based on my subjective, biased observations and experience. FWIW, compiling the BeOS Tracker on PPC with mwcc (the Metrowerks compiler) is a hideous saga. Compiling the same code on x86 with various versions of gcc is not much worse than your average *nix kernel. Yes, I realize we're comparing apples and oranges.
One thing that used to amuse me is that mwcc could take up to -O7 for an optimization option. Also wryly amusing is that if you google for "mwcc", the first result that has anything to do with compilers is called "abiword-dev Archive for June, 99: Re: Stupid mwcc compilers". Heh.
Wow. I got a reply from IIJ-America within 30 minutes.
The prices are out of my league for a simple home ADSL hookup, but I'm pretty impressed with their response time.
> First of all, thank you very much for requesting the
> DSL information. For your location, we can provide SDSL(1Mbps/1Mbps).
> For the price is below, installation(Including Router):
> 1yr. $1020, 2yr. $660, or 3yr. $480
> Monthly charge = $444.
>
> Regarding IPv6, please Contact us either phone at
> XXX-XXX-XXXX or e-mail at info@XXXXX.com. Thank you.
> Thank you for contacting us. Sincerely,
> ===================Shigeharu Miyazaki
Shortly after getting that message, a rolling blackout in California took out an m-l.net router and half of the 'net vanished for about an hour for me. Doh!
Here's one guy's experience setting up a tunnel to the 6bone with OpenBSD. By doing it this way you get a connection the IPv6 backbone and you can run IPv6 in your local network without needing IPv6 services from your ISP.
Note that KAME is for BSD. If you really want Linux, try USAGI.
Yup. Supporting IPv6 is a good thing. IIJ is setting a good example by offering IPv6. I checked the American branch of IIJ to see if they offer it in the states, but it seems that they don't. Their rates are hideously expensive, too. Oh well.
Cisco is fixing to get set up the bomb if they aren't ready to support IPv6 very soon. IPV6 is already here. Some other company could steal Cisco's #1 spot by getting industrial strength IPv6 hardware on the market before Cisco can react.
Customers are always going to be ignorant of the options. Sooner or later, everyone will hype it up and demand it. Look at what's happening these days with wireless. Everybody seems to want it but few ISPs can explain why it makes sense.
Not to mention most network admins are so poor in knowledge about networking fundamentals, that the leap to IPv6 won't happen for a long time yet.
MOST. Some admins are actually quite knowledgeable. Kids, study up on your IPv6 NOW and you'll have a big advantage.
(And yes, I do realize that the primary CPU in a dual system generally runs under a greater load & therfore would require greater degree of cooling,)
Not necessarily. In fact, unless you're running a poor SMP implementation, you shouldn't be loading one CPU heavier than the other.
As long as you have at least 2 active threads (and decent SMP), there is no reason for CPU 0 to be loaded any heavier than CPU 1. Note that Linux 2.2 and FreeBSD 4.x don't really do SMP all that well. If you're talking about those OSes, then yes, you'll see CPU get loaded unevenly.
IMHO, as long as you can switch context and toggle semaphores quickly, you're better off with zillions of threads. Sling those threads around all over the place and don't bother with funky worker pools and coarse 10 millisecond time quanta. Alas, most operating systems don't see it that that way:P
FLAMER DISCLAMER: Linux 2.4 and FreeBSD 5.x both address SMP shortcomings and do things much more efficiently.
Slashdot Mirror
The problem is that we've got a commercial operating system that depends on GNU software.
This is different from a *BSD or MacOS X where GNU only shows up in the development tools... in BeOS, the OS will not even run without the presence of GNU software.
See paragraph 2.b of version 2.0 of the GPL:
You must cause any work that you distribute or publish, that in whole or in part contains or is derived from the Program or any part thereof, to be licensed as a whole at no charge to all third parties under the terms of this License.
Depending on how you interpret that, BeOS violates the GPL. The FSF has been letting it slide. I'm a *huge* BeOS fan and I've always felt a little uneasy knowing that BeOS is skating on thin legal ice.
Yeah... with Be's expertise in being the underdog, I think Palm just may be able to pull it off.
Yay, Tic! You rock, man. I'll keep using it too. Maybe now is the time to assemble a nicely packaged "leak" of Dano, eh?
The second big mistake they made was the damn "focus shift" to internet appliances, where they dumped BeOS and alienated the customers and developers. You can blame Sakoman as well as Gassee for that brillant move.
Quite a few Be folks have moved to Danger. (gotta love those flash movies)
ROFL. You know, there is probably some truth in that too. Hehehe.
That'd be gp3.jpg, not gp3.jpg. Try this link.
No MS Office, true, but there WAS (and still is) Gobe Productive.
Gobe Productive is still alive and kicking ass despite the failure of the Be operating system. (It's just screenshot, guaranteed goatse.cx free.)
Yeah, that's about the one thing Net+ does best. You've got a lightweight browser running on a very snappy GUI, *no* javascript, etc.
There are other little niceties too, like being able to middle click to open in a new window, being able to alias sucky.doubleclick.ads.com to 127.0.0.1, etc.
The last unreleased version of NetPositive was 2.2.2. It's basically version 2.2.1 but with OpenSSL instead of RSA crypto. That way you can *pay* for pr0n and watch it all with the same browser :-P
The critical difference with bash, however, is that without that piece of GNU software the operating system would not work. The FSF hasn't ever pursued it, probably because it seemed like a gray area and Be wasn't really a major player.
Bravo. Sounds like Niels Furgeson really worked on it and come up with legitimate break. This kind of hard work and perseverance should be applauded. His craft is worth of respect.
However, Cryptology has never been something that you can partake in out in the open in full view of the world. I don't blame Niels for not wanting to publish.
Imagine Alan Turing announcing in 1940s "look guys, I figured out how to break those German enigma machines!" Whoops. Treason. You lose. Capital punishment, etc. And there wouldn't even have been a public trial.
In this case though, we're just dealing with commercial video appliances rather than military comms. We're only dealing with Intel and their DMCA-buddies, not the Axis. Niels Furgeson isn't at risk of becoming an unperson if he publishes a a break against HDCP, but there are real-life risks involved. The corporations involved do not play nice. There are many parties involved, vested interests, many millions of dollars at stake. I wish we lived in a world where Niels could publish and not have to worry.
THAN
The scary thing is that the Slashdot story says "Adobe was apparently responsible for the arrest". Corporations should NEVER be permitted to have that much power! What kind of fucked up world do we live in where a private company can dictate whether someone can live free or go to jail?
Actually, if you listen carefully on very high quality equipment, you can hear the difference between 256Kps MP3 and a CD. Read Scot Hacker's livejournal entry about performing just such a test. Yes, he's the same Scot hacker who wrote the O'Reilly book on MP3 ;-) Part of the entry follows below:
 l
I counter that by saying that the difference b/w 256kbps and WAV is so incredibly subtle, and 320kbps would be virtually indistinguishable in every important way. You still get around 4x compression at 320kbps, and you have the advantage of ID3 tags. Why not take advantage of it?
I could tell there was a difference between the 256 and the WAV in the Wasserman duet/vocal, but had trouble putting my finger on the difference. Mike nailed it down, and had me focus on the spatial relationship or distance between the vocalist near the middle of the room and the cello in the rear left of the room. At 256kbps, there is a sort of "veil" that enshrouds the vocals, and ties it spatially to the cellist in the rear left. It's subtle, but he's right - the spatial distinction between them is just not as pronounced at 256kbps as it is with the WAV.
Yup. IIRC it was "IE 5 Advanced Security Privacy beta". The 3rd part cookie thing is missing in IE6 though. Suckage.
I dunno which one actually compiled faster, though.
I'd have to agree based on my subjective, biased observations and experience. FWIW, compiling the BeOS Tracker on PPC with mwcc (the Metrowerks compiler) is a hideous saga. Compiling the same code on x86 with various versions of gcc is not much worse than your average *nix kernel. Yes, I realize we're comparing apples and oranges.
One thing that used to amuse me is that mwcc could take up to -O7 for an optimization option. Also wryly amusing is that if you google for "mwcc", the first result that has anything to do with compilers is called "abiword-dev Archive for June, 99: Re: Stupid mwcc compilers". Heh.
1) California doesn't use the electric chair. Heh. I wonder why not.
Wow. I got a reply from IIJ-America within 30 minutes.
The prices are out of my league for a simple home ADSL hookup, but I'm pretty impressed with their response time.
> First of all, thank you very much for requesting the
> DSL information. For your location, we can provide SDSL(1Mbps/1Mbps).
> For the price is below, installation(Including Router):
> 1yr. $1020, 2yr. $660, or 3yr. $480
> Monthly charge = $444.
>
> Regarding IPv6, please Contact us either phone at
> XXX-XXX-XXXX or e-mail at info@XXXXX.com. Thank you.
> Thank you for contacting us. Sincerely,
> ===================Shigeharu Miyazaki
Shortly after getting that message, a rolling blackout in California took out an m-l.net router and half of the 'net vanished for about an hour for me. Doh!
http://www.dotcomeon.com/
Here's one guy's experience setting up a tunnel to the 6bone with OpenBSD. By doing it this way you get a connection the IPv6 backbone and you can run IPv6 in your local network without needing IPv6 services from your ISP.
Note that KAME is for BSD. If you really want Linux, try USAGI.
Yup. Supporting IPv6 is a good thing. IIJ is setting a good example by offering IPv6. I checked the American branch of IIJ to see if they offer it in the states, but it seems that they don't. Their rates are hideously expensive, too. Oh well.
Cisco is fixing to get set up the bomb if they aren't ready to support IPv6 very soon. IPV6 is already here. Some other company could steal Cisco's #1 spot by getting industrial strength IPv6 hardware on the market before Cisco can react.
Not to mention most network admins are so poor in knowledge about networking fundamentals, that the leap to IPv6 won't happen for a long time yet.
MOST. Some admins are actually quite knowledgeable. Kids, study up on your IPv6 NOW and you'll have a big advantage.
Not necessarily. In fact, unless you're running a poor SMP implementation, you shouldn't be loading one CPU heavier than the other.
As long as you have at least 2 active threads (and decent SMP), there is no reason for CPU 0 to be loaded any heavier than CPU 1. Note that Linux 2.2 and FreeBSD 4.x don't really do SMP all that well. If you're talking about those OSes, then yes, you'll see CPU get loaded unevenly.
IMHO, as long as you can switch context and toggle semaphores quickly, you're better off with zillions of threads. Sling those threads around all over the place and don't bother with funky worker pools and coarse 10 millisecond time quanta. Alas, most operating systems don't see it that that way :P
FLAMER DISCLAMER: Linux 2.4 and FreeBSD 5.x both address SMP shortcomings and do things much more efficiently.