Can someone please give a little background here? For example, why is there "a very real and distinct negative effect that hosting all of you websites under one ip causes"? What's the problem?
As I understand it, we're talking about sites like "//www.abc.com/" and "//www.123.com/" being actually hosted on and sharing the IP address of "//www.someISP.com/", as in "//www.someISP.com/abc/" and "//www.someISP.com/123/". Right? If so, how is the "virtual address" different than the actual addresses under the someISP.com domain? Either way the outside world points you to someISP.com's DNS, which directs you to the appropriate virtual page. What is the "distinct negative effect" of this?
I admit I don't know what I'm talking about here. If I've got this wrong, please enlighten me. If I've got it right, then why is this YRO?
And I suspect that we'll eventually find that half the nuclei are naturally left-handed and half are naturally right-handed. Heck, we'll probably find they flop back and forth, left to right and back again. Just as we found that cave men made Buckyballs a few thousand years ago and nature made a nuclear reactor in South Africa a few hundred thousand years ago.
OK, so it is News for Nerds. But I still say it isn't Stuff that Matters.
What use is this? Talk about esoteric. If it helps us get closer to a Unified Theory, OK, I'm all for it. If it gets us closer to practical Fusion Power, I'm all for it. The article doesn't say what we can do with this knowledge.
AFAICT "left-handed" nuclei do not make for "left-handed" atoms; the atoms behave the same, right? The interaction is at the electron level, not between the nuclei. H2O with left-handed O is still water (but left-handed H would be a neat trick:-)
All I see in his essay is criticism of everyone else's proposed solutions; I see none proposed by him. His position seems to be: "Those who value their privacy are advocating privacy protections that will impeed my freedom to sell my privacy for on-line freebies." That may be, but isn't there a way to protect my privacy while allowing you to give yours away? He rails against "opt-out" systems, but he doesn't say why they're so bad. I think they're great -- they protect my privacy while allowing him to sell his. Apparantly what he doesn't like is the idea of the government somehow mandating opt-out - or anything else - but he gives no arguement how my privacy can be protected without rules mandating it.
And where does he draw the line? Perhaps he's comfortable giving his Social Security and Credit Card numbers to the world, but I'm not. And I doubt if he'd be comfortable with everyone on the planet knowing which brand of condoms he uses, how many he buys each month, where he buys them, and where he goes after buying them. The United States Government is currently mandating systems that will enable them to learn this about you, if they wish (think GPS in your cell phone).
Frankly even though this topic comes up again & again I think they're probably right. Sure my PC
CD-player plays music fine but I prefer to have one in my livingroom dedicated to the audio system. Same
with the DVD player, while it plays fine on the box & 21" monitor I've got one in the lvingroom 'cause it's
better suited / more convenient there.
I expect for many of us a TiVo-type consumer box will be far more popular then a homebuilt.
Well, DUH! But I don't want all these boxes in my livingroom -- I don't have room for it all. My "entertainment center" is full with a TV, DVD player (doubling as CD player), VCR, and receiver. I'd love to play computer games on the TV, but to fit in a computer something else has to go. I see no reason why the DVD/CD player and VCR can't both be replaced by a computer. Make me a "TiVo-type consumer box" that will play and record CDs and DVDs, record and playback TV programs a-la TiVo, act as an MP3 jukebox, play computer games on the TV, do e-mail or any other software -- and I'll buy it. Nobody makes such a box, and I know of nobody who's planning one -- at any price. The Quantum QuickView certainly won't do all that -- but a homebuilt will!
You forgot fourth and fifth types. Actually, I'd say they're the first and second types: First is those who have no use for or can't afford Internet access just to use web-based email (like my father -- I discovered Juno in 1998 and turned him on to it. Sure, it was just Juno, but I'm proud that my 87 year old father was emailing his friends and children before he died. And getting Dad that Juno account was what got my sister online.)
Second is those (like me) who want an email account for things like eBay so we can keep the spam off our regular email. The other types of user you describe came after those first two.
As someone who's used Juno since just about their beginning, I'm disappointed. Now I'll have to find another spam-catcher email service. One without MAPS.
Balmer: "That [fighting Linux] really is Job 1 for us, because that's the threat to the Windows business. That's the threat through that to the Office business. So I'd put the Linux phenomenon really as threat No. 1."
How, exactly, is Linux a threat to the Office business? I was told the reason they didn't port Office to Unix/Linux was that they feared people would run Office on Unix rather than switch from Unix to NT just to get Office. Like Office is so good that corporations will port millions of lines of perfectly good mission-critical code to an entirely different OS just to get Office!
If Linux is a threat to the Office business it's because of Star Office, which runs on several flavors of Windows as well as several flavors of Unix. IMHO, if Microsoft is worried about anything it should be how quickly they can get MSIE and Office ported to Linux so they can nip Star Office in the bud before it becomes a viable alternative to.net.
Here's what's happening in the Real World: The folks in Corporate America who need Unix are bringing Star Office in with the justification that A) it shares files with all the Office users in the corporation, and besides, B) it's Free. Microsoft will soon introduce an annual subscription for Office. The Unix geeks will then say to Corporate IS "We've been using Star Office for free for years, and it runs on Windows -- why don't you give it a try?" And Corporate America will give it a try, once those.net bills start piling up.
Ignoring/.ers for the moment, and thinking of the real software market (large businesses such as GM or GE), doesn't it make more sense that a large installed base of Unix boxes is more likely to buy Office for Unix than to dump their hardware investment and port all their internal Unix apps to NT? Wouldn't that market prefer MSIE for Unix to what Netscape offers? Isn't the whole idea of.NET to get businesses to subscribe to MS software, regardless of where that software will ultimately run? Won't it be easier to put Apache out of business once MSIE is the only browser so they can make MSIIS the only server that talks properly to MSIE? How can MSIE ever be the only browser if they refuse to offer it on Unix?
Wake up, Steve! Remember what's worked so well in the past. You can't kill Linux if you don't Embrace it first!
My real name is Rick Downer, so Rick the Red is a drug thing, although I've personally never taken any reds:-) I think you can see why I don't use my real name.
By senior year they called me "Commie" (Downer --> Red --> Commie), but I'd rather use a druggie nickname than a political one...
So far (AFAIK), only Sprint PCS has announced they intend to use GPS to implement this "feature." And they face the uphill battle of getting all of their customers to throw away perfectly good phones that probably cost them next to nothing when they signed up for service, and replace them with phones that have, what, at least $100 of GPS kludged into them. Guess what will happen when they tell their customers that they'll all have to fork over $100-$250 for a new phone just so the gummint can track their every move!
The other cell phone companies, such as AT&T Wireless, decided to track via the base station. As an AT&T Wireless customer, this has me worried. Disposible, anonymous phones may be the answer. 911 can locate you (in which case you're probably willing to identify yourself), but Officer O'Brien can't. Unless the gummint forces you to "register" your disposable phone, in which case all bets are off.
Looks like The President's Analyst wasn't so far off after all!
are better browsers with more flexibility. Now all we can do is turn all cookies on or off (OK, you can also block so-called "3rd party" cookies while accepting all other cookies -- BFHD). Better browsers is the technological solution to this social/political/economic problem.
For now I, like many others, simply keep cookies.txt read-only, but what I really want is the ability to save specific cookies and forget all others. And, naturally, the read-only 'trick' doesn't work with MSIE (I have to use both brands as part of my job and I've come to hate both).
I want a browser that lets me accept the "remember my login" type of cookies and reject the "let me track which pages you've visited/ads you've seen/where you came from/where you're going" cookies (among other things -- mostly I want a browser that lets me configure everything, not just the few things they deign to let us configure).
How is Nupedia going to replicate those nifty transparancy overlays of the human body (you know, one for the nervous system, one for the skeleton, etc.) that World Book now does so well?
Are you going to turn your lack of a print version into an advantage by doing things the others (I'm thinking WB and EB, not Encarta) can't do on paper?
This isn't such a silly question, when you think about it. My brother and sister are considerably older than I (17 and 14 years, respectively). When I was in Jr. High I discovered an old encyclopedia my parents bought for them, and I had great fun comparing articles in the old one with the same articles in the current encyclopedia in the school library, seeing how the Conventional Wisdom had changed for some subjects, but hadn't changed for others. I think there would be considerable (well, OK, some) interest in historical encyclopedias, if they were available for PG.
Would that it were that simple. Truth is, TPO rules say they have to keep all applications secret until they approve them. Stupid, eh? What did you expect from bureaucrats?
The gummint needs to adopt some Open Source ideas, like peer review, but they won't because that would challange their power base ("if we allow just anyone to review patents they might think they don't need us!")
I was hoping this was about a Beowulf cluster of Crays! Now that would be something.
Still, if you're gonna buy a Beowulf cluster (as opposed to just making one yourself), one with a "Cray" label is way cooler than anything with "IBM" on the box. At least it's an Alpha cluster; it won't say "You-know-what Inside".
Slashdot Mirror
As I understand it, we're talking about sites like "//www.abc.com/" and "//www.123.com/" being actually hosted on and sharing the IP address of "//www.someISP.com/", as in "//www.someISP.com/abc/" and "//www.someISP.com/123/". Right? If so, how is the "virtual address" different than the actual addresses under the someISP.com domain? Either way the outside world points you to someISP.com's DNS, which directs you to the appropriate virtual page. What is the "distinct negative effect" of this?
I admit I don't know what I'm talking about here. If I've got this wrong, please enlighten me. If I've got it right, then why is this YRO?
OK, so it is News for Nerds. But I still say it isn't Stuff that Matters.
AFAICT "left-handed" nuclei do not make for "left-handed" atoms; the atoms behave the same, right? The interaction is at the electron level, not between the nuclei. H2O with left-handed O is still water (but left-handed H would be a neat trick :-)
This may be News for Nerds, but does it matter?
And where does he draw the line? Perhaps he's comfortable giving his Social Security and Credit Card numbers to the world, but I'm not. And I doubt if he'd be comfortable with everyone on the planet knowing which brand of condoms he uses, how many he buys each month, where he buys them, and where he goes after buying them. The United States Government is currently mandating systems that will enable them to learn this about you, if they wish (think GPS in your cell phone).
That would be understandable if they did two things:
1) never do irreparable harm
2) admit your mistakes, say you're sorry, and give the stuff back.
I bet in this case they didn't do 1 and they won't do 2.
Well, DUH! But I don't want all these boxes in my livingroom -- I don't have room for it all. My "entertainment center" is full with a TV, DVD player (doubling as CD player), VCR, and receiver. I'd love to play computer games on the TV, but to fit in a computer something else has to go. I see no reason why the DVD/CD player and VCR can't both be replaced by a computer. Make me a "TiVo-type consumer box" that will play and record CDs and DVDs, record and playback TV programs a-la TiVo, act as an MP3 jukebox, play computer games on the TV, do e-mail or any other software -- and I'll buy it. Nobody makes such a box, and I know of nobody who's planning one -- at any price. The Quantum QuickView certainly won't do all that -- but a homebuilt will!
Second is those (like me) who want an email account for things like eBay so we can keep the spam off our regular email. The other types of user you describe came after those first two.
As someone who's used Juno since just about their beginning, I'm disappointed. Now I'll have to find another spam-catcher email service. One without MAPS.
How, exactly, is Linux a threat to the Office business? I was told the reason they didn't port Office to Unix/Linux was that they feared people would run Office on Unix rather than switch from Unix to NT just to get Office. Like Office is so good that corporations will port millions of lines of perfectly good mission-critical code to an entirely different OS just to get Office!
If Linux is a threat to the Office business it's because of Star Office, which runs on several flavors of Windows as well as several flavors of Unix. IMHO, if Microsoft is worried about anything it should be how quickly they can get MSIE and Office ported to Linux so they can nip Star Office in the bud before it becomes a viable alternative to .net.
Here's what's happening in the Real World: The folks in Corporate America who need Unix are bringing Star Office in with the justification that A) it shares files with all the Office users in the corporation, and besides, B) it's Free. Microsoft will soon introduce an annual subscription for Office. The Unix geeks will then say to Corporate IS "We've been using Star Office for free for years, and it runs on Windows -- why don't you give it a try?" And Corporate America will give it a try, once those .net bills start piling up.
Ignoring /.ers for the moment, and thinking of the real software market (large businesses such as GM or GE), doesn't it make more sense that a large installed base of Unix boxes is more likely to buy Office for Unix than to dump their hardware investment and port all their internal Unix apps to NT? Wouldn't that market prefer MSIE for Unix to what Netscape offers? Isn't the whole idea of .NET to get businesses to subscribe to MS software, regardless of where that software will ultimately run? Won't it be easier to put Apache out of business once MSIE is the only browser so they can make MSIIS the only server that talks properly to MSIE? How can MSIE ever be the only browser if they refuse to offer it on Unix?
Wake up, Steve! Remember what's worked so well in the past. You can't kill Linux if you don't Embrace it first!
By senior year they called me "Commie" (Downer --> Red --> Commie), but I'd rather use a druggie nickname than a political one...
The other cell phone companies, such as AT&T Wireless, decided to track via the base station. As an AT&T Wireless customer, this has me worried. Disposible, anonymous phones may be the answer. 911 can locate you (in which case you're probably willing to identify yourself), but Officer O'Brien can't. Unless the gummint forces you to "register" your disposable phone, in which case all bets are off.
Looks like The President's Analyst wasn't so far off after all!
For now I, like many others, simply keep cookies.txt read-only, but what I really want is the ability to save specific cookies and forget all others. And, naturally, the read-only 'trick' doesn't work with MSIE (I have to use both brands as part of my job and I've come to hate both).
I want a browser that lets me accept the "remember my login" type of cookies and reject the "let me track which pages you've visited/ads you've seen/where you came from/where you're going" cookies (among other things -- mostly I want a browser that lets me configure everything, not just the few things they deign to let us configure).
The ones that are left are earning $250,000/year making decorative gates and railing and fireplace accessories and such for .com millionaires.
Are you going to turn your lack of a print version into an advantage by doing things the others (I'm thinking WB and EB, not Encarta) can't do on paper?
This isn't such a silly question, when you think about it. My brother and sister are considerably older than I (17 and 14 years, respectively). When I was in Jr. High I discovered an old encyclopedia my parents bought for them, and I had great fun comparing articles in the old one with the same articles in the current encyclopedia in the school library, seeing how the Conventional Wisdom had changed for some subjects, but hadn't changed for others. I think there would be considerable (well, OK, some) interest in historical encyclopedias, if they were available for PG.
The gummint needs to adopt some Open Source ideas, like peer review, but they won't because that would challange their power base ("if we allow just anyone to review patents they might think they don't need us!")
Still, if you're gonna buy a Beowulf cluster (as opposed to just making one yourself), one with a "Cray" label is way cooler than anything with "IBM" on the box. At least it's an Alpha cluster; it won't say "You-know-what Inside".