My new meme: If google doesn't know the definition of a word is, it's not a word... First corallary - if you can't find your word as a domain name with.com appended, it's not a word...
My new for 2010 mantra - if I can't read the book on a modern eBook reader (kindle/nook/etc) or their pc/ipod/iphone/blackberry software equivalent, then I'm not buying... It's time the publishers and authors worked all that out and moved on to the 21st century...
The DMCA applies only to copyrighted works, not registered trademarks - note the "Copyright" in the acronym....
This can be taken in several ways - one that the DMCA can't be used to force a provider to remove their clients content or be subject to being participative in the act, but then again the protections for the providers are not there if their customer infringe a trademark either...
In the end, no company can force another company to spend money to support their customers.
Imagine if you and I were neighbors. I have 10 kids and you have 1.
When you send your kid over to play with ours we end up feeding your kid and helping care for him/her while they are here. It's spendy, but NOTHING like when my 10 kids come over to your house and eat your food/popcorn/use your toilet paper, etc.
At some point, the costs of my kids outweigh the benefit that your kids have from playing with mine.
> Cogent is a Tier 1 network service provider (weather or not Sprint and L3 want it to be).
Not to disregard your other comments, but the definition of Tier 1 providers has *always* been that other Tier 1 providers consider you a Tier 1 provider.
By definition, if Sprint and Level 3, both of which other Tier 1 providers consider to be Tier 1 providers, consider Cogent (ie the old PSI network) to not be a Tier 1 provider, then Cogent is not a Tier 1 provider.
It's an unregulated industry and the old boys get to make the rules, Period.
I spent many years playing this game - At Goodnet (and then WinStar) we had peering from hundreds of providers (at the time Level 3 was open to peering with most anyone as they were a start up - PSI had an open peering policy and Sprint was interested in peering with anyone that could source traffic at 3+ points arround the US), but in the end UUnet always held out, so by definition we were not a Tier 1 provider). Period. We played the game just like Cogent did - we found someone else to feed us UUnet routes for free/trade out so that our marketing people could say we were settlement free and Tier 1...
As a Hosting provider, I think it's funny as hell that people gobbled up Cogent so they could offer 1000 Gigabyte dedicated servers/hosting accounts, and now they are finding out that the bandwidth they bought is worth the same as the crap they have been selling.
I remember a time when a friend and I rented a car in Paris and drove to Rome via the Swiss Alps. It was a brand new car, yet by the time we made it to Rome, the brakes were toast - metal on metal screeching.
Lesson learned: use engine braking when going up and down those steep hills!
Not to support NY's new tax plan, but I do not think they are taxing exports from another state - sales taxes are a "use tax" and as such NY is taxing their residents for using products that are sold there...
Even if sales tax is not collected, most states with sales tax require their residents to declare items they bought and did not pay sales tax on so that they can pay a use tax...
It's a list of functional www.*.com web servers in February of 1995. (the archive is from 1998, but the page was last edited in 95)
I didn't think that the web would take off at that point, but was personally responsible for setting up a handful of those web sitest and registering their domains... This was pre-yahoo/hotmail and most other high traffic web sites that exist today.
Yep, a single 8800 can drive two 30" monitors. Both ports are dual link capable.
SLI does only output to a single monitor and I'm not running SLI as I want to use all my monitors and a 8800 is faster than most non 8800 SLI setups in non-SLI mode.
I am running one 30 inch monitor on each card though as I wanted one 30" monitor on a seperate card to eek out the little bit of performance improvement in games that can be had with the card dedicated to only updating one display.
Both cards have 768 megs of ram. 32 bits at 2560 x 1600 is only 16 megabytes so I think any of the dual link cards can handle two 30" displays.
As I wrote above, I installed the 64 bit version of Vista Ultimate and used beta drivers initially(I had downloaded them the weekend before) then after noticing one of my monitors was not working at full resolution I downloaded the release drivers from the Nvidia site.
I have also run multiple dx9 based games.;-)
There may be cards with better driver support, but does that mean that Nvidia should get sued because they don't have the best drivers or that someone recommends another card?
My Nvidia + Windows Vista experience has been essentially *perfect*.
I have two EVGA Nvidia 8800 GTX video cards with 768 megabytes of ram.
I purchased Windows Vista Ultimate at Midnight on Monday.
I installed the 64 bit version of Vista Wednesday morning (24 hours later) using beta drivers released by Nvidia earlier (found off of guru3d.com I believe).
I checked the Nvidia web site later that day and they had release drivers (one of my monitors was not being recognized for its full resolution capabilities with the beta drivers).
I downloaded and installed the release drivers from the Nvidia web site.
I have had no video problems at all. I am able to drive 3 monitors at once (two 30" 2560x1600 monitors and one rotated 1600x1200 monitor), play games at full 2560x1600 resolution with comparable screen rates as prior to Vista upgrade, use the nifty Aero Interface, etc.
I think if this goes to court, someone will ask - so when did Microsoft release Vista to the public? Ok, how long after that did you have to wait for your drivers? One day? Why are we here today?
Compared to time consuming frustration on getting all my other business applications running, the idea that someone is suing over nvidia drivers is comical to me. Too bad their web site is slashdotted as I would love to sign on there and call all of them morons. I wonder if they'll trim those posts.;-)
Simplicita ZBX http://simplicita.com/ does something like that now, but it's for blocking your own users traffic prior to letting it out onto the Internet at large, not for redirect clients on the network the users are browsing.
It used to be, though it's not so popular any more, that web servers defaulted to collecting in-addr.arpa names for the incoming browser requests. If the incoming ip didn't have something set up for it's reverse ptr record, the web server would stall out trying to obtain that information. This lead to increased load on the web server (and why it's not the default any more) and a really bad browsing experience for the web client.
Any service provider that has users on ips without ptr records is doing a disservice to their users and to the net at large.
The DMCA does not require providers to have a knee jerk reaction - in fact all they had to do was ask you to remove it OR respond under penalty of perjury that you disagree with the original complaint at which point you and the complainer can fight it out in court and the provider is protected because they did what they were supposed to do.
If you didn't take it down or didn't respond that you disagree with copyright status in a reasonable amount of time, then the provider would have to take you down or become liable themselves. "Reasonable" is not measured in hours.
And... The only reason I come here is for the discussion... The articles are secondary... Many times written by some beat reporter that in no way can produce all the information the comments here produce...
That being said, I do usually read the article in question, just so I don't write something that gets a 'RTFA' response...:-)
There are STILL multiple root exploits that we know FOR SURE work on Cpanel that have yet to be fixed. In one case it is a simple one liner that will pop root on any Cpanel install. This still works even after their "patch".
If this is indeed true, and you have told the Cpanel folks, and they have not fixed it in a reasonable amount of time, and you have not told the world, then you are in my opinion part of the problem and not part of the solution.
I wouldn't claim that we have any special relationship with Cpanel, but every 'bug', be it critical or minor in nature that we have reported, has been addressed.
Do the right thing - share the exploits that they have not fixed so those of us that care can fix them on our servers . The public notice will force Cpanel to address the problem and save you from having to install your bandaids every time you update the softare....
You obviously haven't read enough Tom Clancy books.:-) Don't you know that the US always wins????;-)
All kidding aside, I think that our response to any Chinese nuclear attack would be disastrous for all involved, especially the Chinese. That's why China hasn't just marched over to Taiwan yet and planted a flag in the(ir) ground.
Besides, anyone that has visited Shanghai (as I have) would know that the reason China doesn't really give a poop about Taiwan and Hong Kong is that in 50 to 100 years those islands will just be quaint compared to Shanghai in all relevant aspects.
Slashdot Mirror
Mea Culpa... Makes sense now. ;-)
My new meme: If google doesn't know the definition of a word is, it's not a word... .com appended, it's not a word...
First corallary - if you can't find your word as a domain name with
Define "atermal"
And then....
Stack Overflow...
Commenting on old slashdot article....
My new for 2010 mantra - if I can't read the book on a modern eBook reader (kindle/nook/etc) or their pc/ipod/iphone/blackberry software equivalent, then I'm not buying... It's time the publishers and authors worked all that out and moved on to the 21st century...
The DMCA applies only to copyrighted works, not registered trademarks - note the "Copyright" in the acronym....
This can be taken in several ways - one that the DMCA can't be used to force a provider to remove their clients content or be subject to being participative in the act, but then again the protections for the providers are not there if their customer infringe a trademark either...
Error: Circular reference in declaration.
Compilation failed....
when will slashdot users stop with the "first post" mentality and actually add something to the conversation??????????????????????
In the end, no company can force another company to spend money to support their customers.
Imagine if you and I were neighbors. I have 10 kids and you have 1.
When you send your kid over to play with ours we end up feeding your kid and helping care for him/her while they are here. It's spendy, but NOTHING like when my 10 kids come over to your house and eat your food/popcorn/use your toilet paper, etc.
At some point, the costs of my kids outweigh the benefit that your kids have from playing with mine.
Peering is much the same....
Darin
> Cogent is a Tier 1 network service provider (weather or not Sprint and L3 want it to be).
Not to disregard your other comments, but the definition of Tier 1 providers has *always* been that other Tier 1 providers consider you a Tier 1 provider.
By definition, if Sprint and Level 3, both of which other Tier 1 providers consider to be Tier 1 providers, consider Cogent (ie the old PSI network) to not be a Tier 1 provider, then Cogent is not a Tier 1 provider.
It's an unregulated industry and the old boys get to make the rules, Period.
I spent many years playing this game - At Goodnet (and then WinStar) we had peering from hundreds of providers (at the time Level 3 was open to peering with most anyone as they were a start up - PSI had an open peering policy and Sprint was interested in peering with anyone that could source traffic at 3+ points arround the US), but in the end UUnet always held out, so by definition we were not a Tier 1 provider). Period. We played the game just like Cogent did - we found someone else to feed us UUnet routes for free/trade out so that our marketing people could say we were settlement free and Tier 1...
As a Hosting provider, I think it's funny as hell that people gobbled up Cogent so they could offer 1000 Gigabyte dedicated servers/hosting accounts, and now they are finding out that the bandwidth they bought is worth the same as the crap they have been selling.
I remember a time when a friend and I rented a car in Paris and drove to Rome via the Swiss Alps. It was a brand new car, yet by the time we made it to Rome, the brakes were toast - metal on metal screeching.
Lesson learned: use engine braking when going up and down those steep hills!
And HP's Dashboard for Windows was a play on HP's Motif dock from their Unix Workstation line... That was at least 1992 that they were using that...
Not to support NY's new tax plan, but I do not think they are taxing exports from another state - sales taxes are a "use tax" and as such NY is taxing their residents for using products that are sold there...
Even if sales tax is not collected, most states with sales tax require their residents to declare items they bought and did not pay sales tax on so that they can pay a use tax...
I think this list is more apropos as people tend to think of the world wide web 'being' the Internet...
http://web.archive.org/web/19980113224527/http://www.fidouk.org/wwwcom.html
It's a list of functional www.*.com web servers in February of 1995. (the archive is from 1998, but the page was last edited in 95)
I didn't think that the web would take off at that point, but was personally responsible for setting up a handful of those web sitest and registering their domains... This was pre-yahoo/hotmail and most other high traffic web sites that exist today.
"My God, it's full of lava!"
--
"How inappropriate to call this planet earth when it is quite clearly Ocean." - Arthur C. Clarke
Yep, a single 8800 can drive two 30" monitors. Both ports are dual link capable.
SLI does only output to a single monitor and I'm not running SLI as I want to use all my monitors and a 8800 is faster than most non 8800 SLI setups in non-SLI mode.
I am running one 30 inch monitor on each card though as I wanted one 30" monitor on a seperate card to eek out the little bit of performance improvement in games that can be had with the card dedicated to only updating one display.
Both cards have 768 megs of ram. 32 bits at 2560 x 1600 is only 16 megabytes so I think any of the dual link cards can handle two 30" displays.
As I wrote above, I installed the 64 bit version of Vista Ultimate and used beta drivers initially(I had downloaded them the weekend before) then after noticing one of my monitors was not working at full resolution I downloaded the release drivers from the Nvidia site.
;-)
I have also run multiple dx9 based games.
There may be cards with better driver support, but does that mean that Nvidia should get sued because they don't have the best drivers or that someone recommends another card?
My Nvidia + Windows Vista experience has been essentially *perfect*.
;-)
I have two EVGA Nvidia 8800 GTX video cards with 768 megabytes of ram.
I purchased Windows Vista Ultimate at Midnight on Monday.
I installed the 64 bit version of Vista Wednesday morning (24 hours later) using beta drivers released by Nvidia earlier (found off of guru3d.com I believe).
I checked the Nvidia web site later that day and they had release drivers (one of my monitors was not being recognized for its full resolution capabilities with the beta drivers).
I downloaded and installed the release drivers from the Nvidia web site.
I have had no video problems at all. I am able to drive 3 monitors at once (two 30" 2560x1600 monitors and one rotated 1600x1200 monitor), play games at full 2560x1600 resolution with comparable screen rates as prior to Vista upgrade, use the nifty Aero Interface, etc.
I think if this goes to court, someone will ask - so when did Microsoft release Vista to the public? Ok, how long after that did you have to wait for your drivers? One day? Why are we here today?
Compared to time consuming frustration on getting all my other business applications running, the idea that someone is suing over nvidia drivers is comical to me. Too bad their web site is slashdotted as I would love to sign on there and call all of them morons. I wonder if they'll trim those posts.
Simplicita ZBX http://simplicita.com/ does something like that now, but it's for blocking your own users traffic prior to letting it out onto the Internet at large, not for redirect clients on the network the users are browsing.
It used to be, though it's not so popular any more, that web servers defaulted to collecting in-addr.arpa names for the incoming browser requests. If the incoming ip didn't have something set up for it's reverse ptr record, the web server would stall out trying to obtain that information. This lead to increased load on the web server (and why it's not the default any more) and a really bad browsing experience for the web client.
Any service provider that has users on ips without ptr records is doing a disservice to their users and to the net at large.
The DMCA does not require providers to have a knee jerk reaction - in fact all they had to do was ask you to remove it OR respond under penalty of perjury that you disagree with the original complaint at which point you and the complainer can fight it out in court and the provider is protected because they did what they were supposed to do.
If you didn't take it down or didn't respond that you disagree with copyright status in a reasonable amount of time, then the provider would have to take you down or become liable themselves. "Reasonable" is not measured in hours.
I would not blame the DMCA in your situation.
Darin
And... The only reason I come here is for the discussion... The articles are secondary... Many times written by some beat reporter that in no way can produce all the information the comments here produce...
:-)
That being said, I do usually read the article in question, just so I don't write something that gets a 'RTFA' response...
Yes, for over 5 years. ;-)
1 4441
;-)
Paypal Debit Bar.
http://www.internetnews.com/ec-news/article.php/9
What I want to know is if I get the cash back bonus using their virtual credit card like I would with the real one.
If this is indeed true, and you have told the Cpanel folks, and they have not fixed it in a reasonable amount of time, and you have not told the world, then you are in my opinion part of the problem and not part of the solution.
I wouldn't claim that we have any special relationship with Cpanel, but every 'bug', be it critical or minor in nature that we have reported, has been addressed.
Do the right thing - share the exploits that they have not fixed so those of us that care can fix them on our servers . The public notice will force Cpanel to address the problem and save you from having to install your bandaids every time you update the softare....
> My experience with Java, and I know I'd completely fail a system administration interview.
You'd probably fail a basic grammar test also...
You obviously haven't read enough Tom Clancy books. :-) Don't you know that the US always wins???? ;-)
All kidding aside, I think that our response to any Chinese nuclear attack would be disastrous for all involved, especially the Chinese. That's why China hasn't just marched over to Taiwan yet and planted a flag in the(ir) ground.
Besides, anyone that has visited Shanghai (as I have) would know that the reason China doesn't really give a poop about Taiwan and Hong Kong is that in 50 to 100 years those islands will just be quaint compared to Shanghai in all relevant aspects.