"Instead, I take Echinacea and Goldenseal three times a day until the infection goes away"
How are you taking this? I have the same sort of problem (more on this in a second) and tried echinacea/goldenseal tea. Goldenseal is basically a weed when considering it as tea. Horrible taste, couldn't do more than sip it once every few minutes.
Last season, i was drinking water habitually, and i found i had fewer problems with sinusitis. Maybe i'm just growing out of it, but water (not juice, not soda, nor tea) seemed to help. Also, I definitely notice the less milk and sugar i ingest when having heavy sinus drainage, the faster it goes away.
This question is pointed towards content producers. That is, how do i keep my page from getting entangled.
Personally, i think it's great, but i can see how people would object (Smart Tags are a bit more evil, because they don't fit into the framework of what's already there, but instead are enforced from outside).
How many candidates vote for their opponents in elections? Even though they stand to make lots of money, they vote for themselves (in general).
The MIT system was technically superior to Dolby, by apparently a small margin. The votes were already swaying towards Dolby, so to ensure that a quality standard was used, he voted for Dolby. The small margin be damned.
See also: United States Presidential Election, 2000; the effect of Nader on Gore's constituency, with an emphasis on the outcomes.
Jin and Dolby carved out a deal between themselves that gave both Jin, Dolby and MIT a cut of the winnings, regardless of who won.
Yes, which is not an issue in my opinion. It's a conflict of interest, but both his interests were served, as well as the public's.
The "issue" is that he voted for a technically inferior system over the technically superior one. The article claims that Dolby is only slightly worse than the MIT system.
Also, the technically superior one he helped develop (one can only assume). So it's safe to assume that he would see some benefit from this as well.
For compatibility, all involved should have gone with the Philips system, which the Europeans were already working with. But the Philips system was technically inferior to both MIT and Dolby.
Dolby seemed to already have more support, so Jin could compromise and support Dolby, ensuring that a quality system was used.
So: to sum up: Jin probably had a stake in the MIT system being adopted, but was willing to compromise.
The MIT and Dolby systems were about the same quality, while the Philips was clearly inferior. The board was already leaning towards Dolby, and by voting for MIT, Jin might allow Philips to snatch away the standard. So, voting for Dolby was a compromise that benefitted all involved.
(not that this is exactly what happened, i'm sure, but i think it does have some impact on things. You can see things like this happening in public development all over; best current example is LVMS in the linux kernel. Not all of them involve money as blatantly as this one, however.)
After reading the article, i'm a bit less outraged. The 30M$ is royalty payments, apparently on technology developed at MIT. The professor in question is the sole inventor, which is why they're giving hime 8M$ of it.
Please read the article, it's actually a bit more of "Dolby tried to screw MIT out of royalties" instead of "MIT accepts bribe to vouch for Dolby standard."
The problem is actually with video, has little to do with VM. The GUI is just too damned much for the video card to handle, so your CPU is bearing the brunt of it. Alpha transparency is Expensive, etc. You'd be better off with a PowerBook (or a VAIO running linux, which is much more tweakable =)
Getting newer versions of X helps a hell of a lot as well. 10.0 was dog slow on my 400 powerbook G4. 10.1 is better. haven't tried 10.2 because i refuse to pay for basic software updates (i'll probably actually wind up switching it to linuxppc sometime because Apple's software just isn't doing it for me).
*sigh of discontent, OSX seemed so cool and was such a letdown to me*
Because when you're working out, you often want to know how long you've been going. "OK, good, i did my 5 minutes of hard running, time for a smoke!", etc. Joggers, treadmill junkies, and other people-who-move are a target audience for these things (remember anti-skip CD players? "Perfect for Runners!")
It'd surprise me if this didn't come with an armband of some sort, either out of the box or as an option.
The hardware is pretty much a constant cost between both platforms.
Say it takes 2 really good wizards and a full team 3 months to implement the firmware for x86 (VESA mode, basically) and a simliar group of other developers to do the Open Firmware code. QA for the two will probably be simliar as well.
So, you've got the same number of dollars going into the code on both sides. But one side is going to be shipped to something on the order of 10x more users. So they can afford to charge a tenth for it and not lose money on the development.
They can either charge more for the mac version, or they can spread the cost out, which is rather crazy from business standpoint -- mac is, was, and always will be, a niche market (sad but true).
Anyway, they overdo it a bit, but you really should expect to pay more for the mac versions of just about anything, because they have to recoup the cost of porting/QAing/etc on the platform.
(All this is, of course, moot for anything standards-based, like USB devices. the price difference for standards-compliant USB devices makes me laugh =)
it's not really a BW issue, but a server-side processing issue.
delimited protocols don't scale terribly well. you have to do a lot of "grab some data, scan for the delimeter, if not there, buffer and grab some more" crap.
especially in C, implementations become a lot trickier, finickier, and break much more subtly when you start using delimited protocols.
and it only makes trivial/prototype implementations easier. implementation in C with a fully encapsulated protocol is trivial (especially something based on TLVs like OSCAR, which is a really wonderful protocol to work on), but trickier in things like perl, where access to binary data isn't as common.
there are a lot of factors that affect this, but in general, looking for delimiters in a large message body is almost as expensive as routing that message. putting the message body length in the packet/chunk header is much more efficient, but still has more overhead than is really needed. and nobody does it that way in IM =) (HTTP does it)
(i used to work for ActiveBuddy, where we handled tens of thousands of messages per second. The MSN stuff was notably more complicated at the protocol-reading level than the AIM stuff. And when you're shooting for 10+kmessages/s, the extra code Really Matters (none of the processing was done on this machine, its job was to translate to an internal protocol) )
AIM and ICQ have been the same network since icq2k. It's just that they've been limiting the ability to speak between the two.
You could log in to AIM servers with an ICQ UID and join ChatNav (AIM chat rooms) before. dunno if you still can, don't care to test. You simply couldn't IM AIM users (you could still message ICQ users).
ICQ2K's protocol is just OSCAR with the ICQ bits stuffed in via new TLVs.
-josh, who helped with OSCAR RE and did the first (afaik) partial icq2k implementation (See libfaim or the aimster/madster client-side proxy)
He calls them "folders" earlier in the article. That is the point at which i stopped reading (it was well after he revealed things which i learned about thirty seconds after switching my boot device to OSX)
the repeat rate thing can be fixed by software. you just have to reinit the setting.
the PS/2 mouse thing is pretty hopeless, as you have to send a short stream at the mouse to initialize it, and i don't know of anyone that has such a feature built in (i think pavel had it in the kernel at some point, but it's probably gone again)
Living on a network that agressively caches HTTP over 80 (tranparently, without letting us know this up front. proxy is a NetCache NetApp according to headers), i've developed an opinion on this otherwise-sane sounding idea.
It really sucks.
If a site doesn't explicitly set the Cache-Control header, the proxy assumes "cache freely". I usually have to hit reload between 2 and 4 times to get a page to actually refresh on the proxy. If this proxy served all of Charter, then i wouldn't complain. It makes Good Fiscal Sense (and they ream me out enough as it is, no need to give them excuses to charge more). But it's only for my area, and it looks to be for a subset of my area. So why is it used? i don't know.
it's also annoying in that you Must use a FQDN or IP address in your URI (if using http/1.1), otherwise the proxy can't work its magic and gives you a 502 error.
in the states, it's a little trickier, as we aren't just one or two off, but a full 5-8. it's annoying to work with the numbers from that. one or two are easy, more than 4 is difficult for me (i spent the summer in Europe, being able to go from greece to france with only one hour's difference was nice).
just come in on inertia... you don't have drag to worry about in space.
or perhaps keep some tanks of supercooled gas (liquid, solid, whatever) and use that as propellant (slowly, as you said). if you use small enough amounts, it shouldn't be too visible as a cloud, and (if i remember my chemistry right), PV=nRT, where n and R are constants, so, as long as P is going down at the same rate that V is going up (ie: you're jetting it out quick enough), T should stay nice and relatively constant, not emitting too much IR.
and i thought taking chemistry was an absolute waste of time. pssh (no pun intended)
eh, i had no problems with it. i also don't use IRC and i didn't run any public servers (for the obvious reasons that connectivity sucked. and that it went down 3-4 days a month...)
any of the boonie-broadband alternatives require use of MS windows, sadly. just lock the machine down, and go from there. i ran _zero_ public services from the machine, and didn't ever use it to do anything (the occasionally foray into IE5 excepted... it was my only windows machine).
just get a decent portscanner and scan the machine regularly, noting any changes. should be plenty of self-defense.
if i had stayed in my previous house any longer i might have some progress on the linux bonding front, but i didn't, sorry. currently living off "borrowed" cable from my neighbor and then going to europe in a few days =)
half.com (for sure, not certain about the other two) lists shipping right next to the item price. Very Straightforward, very handy.
i happily recommend them for buying books, etc, when you dont care that the author receive a cut on a used book (when you do, find the publisher and order there).
bonding and NAT both don't work. Trust me, i tried. i should still have the scripts that i played with (hell, i even tried kludging the bonding driver to allow ppp/eth bonding)
i have yet to see anyone actually accomplish this on linux.
your best bet is to take a little POS 2k or XP machine and run ICS on that. if this is all you runo n that machine, it should be plenty stable.
the system for this is unbelievably braindead, so it only works with special software in MacOS and/or with the broken TCP/IP in windows (They do the bonding by just setting the correct src ip in the 10baseT traffic coming from the cable modem...)
just set up ICS on the XP machine (despite what the cable company says, this should work. the modem doesn't set the dest right.. and windows doesn't really care).
put the router off of there, and then run your machines behind that, if you really care to.
For system-level services, third-party support is not a real helpful thing.
And yes, all of linux is third-party, period. Linux is nothing but a kernel, it doesn't even have its own bootloader (mostly... it's possible to boot the kernel without using a proper bootloader, but it really limits usefulness). But most of it is Open, so you aren't truly dependent on that third party for support.
Linux also wasn't, isn't, and will never be a Real Unix, as nobody really has interest in getting it certified. Fine by me, i still use it for most of my computing needs (at work i'm stuck on an NT workstation... if you take a shit support job after getting sick of programming, look at their workstations before starting).
I would type out "X Window System" if i wasn't lazy. Be glad i didn't just call it X11, which is what i wanted to use.
Under OS X, the GUI is not an X server. It's a lot more advanced than X, which has its pros and cons.
For example, it supports transparency natively, and z-coordinates. But it isn't network-transparent out of the box.
In any case, yes, you could to Office on *nix if you were to port Cocoa or Carbon to the platform of choice, but i don't see Apple doing that anytime soon.
IE for Solaris is based on a partial port of win32 to solaris--with this you could theoretically port office for win32 to Solaris and therefore *nix.
Anyway, don't confuse OS X with a Real Unix with Real X Windows. Support for X on OSX is a third-party effort at best.
Slashdot Mirror
"Instead, I take Echinacea and Goldenseal three times a day until the infection goes away"
How are you taking this? I have the same sort of problem (more on this in a second) and tried echinacea/goldenseal tea. Goldenseal is basically a weed when considering it as tea. Horrible taste, couldn't do more than sip it once every few minutes.
Last season, i was drinking water habitually, and i found i had fewer problems with sinusitis. Maybe i'm just growing out of it, but water (not juice, not soda, nor tea) seemed to help. Also, I definitely notice the less milk and sugar i ingest when having heavy sinus drainage, the faster it goes away.
This question is pointed towards content producers. That is, how do i keep my page from getting entangled.
Personally, i think it's great, but i can see how people would object (Smart Tags are a bit more evil, because they don't fit into the framework of what's already there, but instead are enforced from outside).
How many candidates vote for their opponents in elections? Even though they stand to make lots of money, they vote for themselves (in general).
The MIT system was technically superior to Dolby, by apparently a small margin. The votes were already swaying towards Dolby, so to ensure that a quality standard was used, he voted for Dolby. The small margin be damned.
See also: United States Presidential Election, 2000; the effect of Nader on Gore's constituency, with an emphasis on the outcomes.
Jin and Dolby carved out a deal between themselves that gave both Jin, Dolby and MIT a cut of the winnings, regardless of who won.
Yes, which is not an issue in my opinion. It's a conflict of interest, but both his interests were served, as well as the public's.
The "issue" is that he voted for a technically inferior system over the technically superior one. The article claims that Dolby is only slightly worse than the MIT system.
Also, the technically superior one he helped develop (one can only assume). So it's safe to assume that he would see some benefit from this as well.
For compatibility, all involved should have gone with the Philips system, which the Europeans were already working with. But the Philips system was technically inferior to both MIT and Dolby.
Dolby seemed to already have more support, so Jin could compromise and support Dolby, ensuring that a quality system was used.
So: to sum up: Jin probably had a stake in the MIT system being adopted, but was willing to compromise.
The MIT and Dolby systems were about the same quality, while the Philips was clearly inferior. The board was already leaning towards Dolby, and by voting for MIT, Jin might allow Philips to snatch away the standard. So, voting for Dolby was a compromise that benefitted all involved.
(not that this is exactly what happened, i'm sure, but i think it does have some impact on things. You can see things like this happening in public development all over; best current example is LVMS in the linux kernel. Not all of them involve money as blatantly as this one, however.)
After reading the article, i'm a bit less outraged. The 30M$ is royalty payments, apparently on technology developed at MIT. The professor in question is the sole inventor, which is why they're giving hime 8M$ of it.
Please read the article, it's actually a bit more of "Dolby tried to screw MIT out of royalties" instead of "MIT accepts bribe to vouch for Dolby standard."
yay for padded stream protocols!
ahem.
Actually, Tin Foil has been a key part of the catering teams for most of Mr. Bacon's movies.
Unfortunately, hollywood always screws the little guy, so he doesn't get the recognition he so deserves.
The problem is actually with video, has little to do with VM. The GUI is just too damned much for the video card to handle, so your CPU is bearing the brunt of it. Alpha transparency is Expensive, etc. You'd be better off with a PowerBook (or a VAIO running linux, which is much more tweakable =)
Getting newer versions of X helps a hell of a lot as well. 10.0 was dog slow on my 400 powerbook G4. 10.1 is better. haven't tried 10.2 because i refuse to pay for basic software updates (i'll probably actually wind up switching it to linuxppc sometime because Apple's software just isn't doing it for me).
*sigh of discontent, OSX seemed so cool and was such a letdown to me*
a timer (Why?).
Because when you're working out, you often want to know how long you've been going. "OK, good, i did my 5 minutes of hard running, time for a smoke!", etc. Joggers, treadmill junkies, and other people-who-move are a target audience for these things (remember anti-skip CD players? "Perfect for Runners!")
It'd surprise me if this didn't come with an armband of some sort, either out of the box or as an option.
It's an issue of logistics.
The hardware is pretty much a constant cost between both platforms.
Say it takes 2 really good wizards and a full team 3 months to implement the firmware for x86 (VESA mode, basically) and a simliar group of other developers to do the Open Firmware code. QA for the two will probably be simliar as well.
So, you've got the same number of dollars going into the code on both sides. But one side is going to be shipped to something on the order of 10x more users. So they can afford to charge a tenth for it and not lose money on the development.
They can either charge more for the mac version, or they can spread the cost out, which is rather crazy from business standpoint -- mac is, was, and always will be, a niche market (sad but true).
Anyway, they overdo it a bit, but you really should expect to pay more for the mac versions of just about anything, because they have to recoup the cost of porting/QAing/etc on the platform.
(All this is, of course, moot for anything standards-based, like USB devices. the price difference for standards-compliant USB devices makes me laugh =)
it's not really a BW issue, but a server-side processing issue.
delimited protocols don't scale terribly well. you have to do a lot of "grab some data, scan for the delimeter, if not there, buffer and grab some more" crap.
especially in C, implementations become a lot trickier, finickier, and break much more subtly when you start using delimited protocols.
and it only makes trivial/prototype implementations easier. implementation in C with a fully encapsulated protocol is trivial (especially something based on TLVs like OSCAR, which is a really wonderful protocol to work on), but trickier in things like perl, where access to binary data isn't as common.
there are a lot of factors that affect this, but in general, looking for delimiters in a large message body is almost as expensive as routing that message. putting the message body length in the packet/chunk header is much more efficient, but still has more overhead than is really needed. and nobody does it that way in IM =) (HTTP does it)
(i used to work for ActiveBuddy, where we handled tens of thousands of messages per second. The MSN stuff was notably more complicated at the protocol-reading level than the AIM stuff. And when you're shooting for 10+kmessages/s, the extra code Really Matters (none of the processing was done on this machine, its job was to translate to an internal protocol) )
Ironically enough, MSN Messenger is based quite heavily on an open standard =) (IMPP iirc)
It happened about the same time as TOC, mostly because MS wanted to force AOL's hand. This was during the whole MS/AIM interoperability debacle.
text protocols are just nasty. and don't get me started on XML-based protocols.. (hi Temas/Jer, other random Jabber guys i've hashed this over with =)
-josh, former OSCAR RE geek and all-around binary protocol cheerleader.
AIM and ICQ have been the same network since icq2k. It's just that they've been limiting the ability to speak between the two.
You could log in to AIM servers with an ICQ UID and join ChatNav (AIM chat rooms) before. dunno if you still can, don't care to test. You simply couldn't IM AIM users (you could still message ICQ users).
ICQ2K's protocol is just OSCAR with the ICQ bits stuffed in via new TLVs.
-josh, who helped with OSCAR RE and did the first (afaik) partial icq2k implementation (See libfaim or the aimster/madster client-side proxy)
He calls them "folders" earlier in the article. That is the point at which i stopped reading (it was well after he revealed things which i learned about thirty seconds after switching my boot device to OSX)
Spoon! Spoon! Spoon!
(see above Developer posts)
the repeat rate thing can be fixed by software. you just have to reinit the setting.
the PS/2 mouse thing is pretty hopeless, as you have to send a short stream at the mouse to initialize it, and i don't know of anyone that has such a feature built in (i think pavel had it in the kernel at some point, but it's probably gone again)
Living on a network that agressively caches HTTP over 80 (tranparently, without letting us know this up front. proxy is a NetCache NetApp according to headers), i've developed an opinion on this otherwise-sane sounding idea.
It really sucks.
If a site doesn't explicitly set the Cache-Control header, the proxy assumes "cache freely". I usually have to hit reload between 2 and 4 times to get a page to actually refresh on the proxy. If this proxy served all of Charter, then i wouldn't complain. It makes Good Fiscal Sense (and they ream me out enough as it is, no need to give them excuses to charge more). But it's only for my area, and it looks to be for a subset of my area. So why is it used? i don't know.
it's also annoying in that you Must use a FQDN or IP address in your URI (if using http/1.1), otherwise the proxy can't work its magic and gives you a 502 error.
Not that i'm bitter.
in the states, it's a little trickier, as we aren't just one or two off, but a full 5-8. it's annoying to work with the numbers from that. one or two are easy, more than 4 is difficult for me (i spent the summer in Europe, being able to go from greece to france with only one hour's difference was nice).
just come in on inertia... you don't have drag to worry about in space.
or perhaps keep some tanks of supercooled gas (liquid, solid, whatever) and use that as propellant (slowly, as you said). if you use small enough amounts, it shouldn't be too visible as a cloud, and (if i remember my chemistry right), PV=nRT, where n and R are constants, so, as long as P is going down at the same rate that V is going up (ie: you're jetting it out quick enough), T should stay nice and relatively constant, not emitting too much IR.
and i thought taking chemistry was an absolute waste of time. pssh (no pun intended)
eh, i had no problems with it. i also don't use IRC and i didn't run any public servers (for the obvious reasons that connectivity sucked. and that it went down 3-4 days a month...)
any of the boonie-broadband alternatives require use of MS windows, sadly. just lock the machine down, and go from there. i ran _zero_ public services from the machine, and didn't ever use it to do anything (the occasionally foray into IE5 excepted... it was my only windows machine).
just get a decent portscanner and scan the machine regularly, noting any changes. should be plenty of self-defense.
if i had stayed in my previous house any longer i might have some progress on the linux bonding front, but i didn't, sorry. currently living off "borrowed" cable from my neighbor and then going to europe in a few days =)
half.com (for sure, not certain about the other two) lists shipping right next to the item price. Very Straightforward, very handy.
i happily recommend them for buying books, etc, when you dont care that the author receive a cut on a used book (when you do, find the publisher and order there).
bonding and NAT both don't work. Trust me, i tried. i should still have the scripts that i played with (hell, i even tried kludging the bonding driver to allow ppp/eth bonding)
i have yet to see anyone actually accomplish this on linux.
your best bet is to take a little POS 2k or XP machine and run ICS on that. if this is all you runo n that machine, it should be plenty stable.
Linux on one-way? sorry, try again.
the system for this is unbelievably braindead, so it only works with special software in MacOS and/or with the broken TCP/IP in windows (They do the bonding by just setting the correct src ip in the 10baseT traffic coming from the cable modem...)
just set up ICS on the XP machine (despite what the cable company says, this should work. the modem doesn't set the dest right.. and windows doesn't really care).
put the router off of there, and then run your machines behind that, if you really care to.
For system-level services, third-party support is not a real helpful thing.
And yes, all of linux is third-party, period. Linux is nothing but a kernel, it doesn't even have its own bootloader (mostly... it's possible to boot the kernel without using a proper bootloader, but it really limits usefulness). But most of it is Open, so you aren't truly dependent on that third party for support.
Linux also wasn't, isn't, and will never be a Real Unix, as nobody really has interest in getting it certified. Fine by me, i still use it for most of my computing needs (at work i'm stuck on an NT workstation... if you take a shit support job after getting sick of programming, look at their workstations before starting).
I would type out "X Window System" if i wasn't lazy. Be glad i didn't just call it X11, which is what i wanted to use.
Under OS X, the GUI is not an X server. It's a lot more advanced than X, which has its pros and cons.
For example, it supports transparency natively, and z-coordinates. But it isn't network-transparent out of the box.
In any case, yes, you could to Office on *nix if you were to port Cocoa or Carbon to the platform of choice, but i don't see Apple doing that anytime soon.
IE for Solaris is based on a partial port of win32 to solaris--with this you could theoretically port office for win32 to Solaris and therefore *nix.
Anyway, don't confuse OS X with a Real Unix with Real X Windows. Support for X on OSX is a third-party effort at best.