...it's what I do for ICQ, and works pretty much perfectly. If people need to reach you and they're not on your list, e-mail and phone calls and fax (all of which provide enough spam to last a lifetime) will do... -- Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies.
but why not reserve just country codes then, not everything?
Possible explanation: New countries are popping up all the time. Are only countries which exist in the 1990's (or whenever) allowed to have their own domain? -- Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies.
I mean, with companies like internic.ca making money just by abusing customer confusion, it seems only sensible to be blocking off the names. For most of them, all this rule does is keep the ICANN from having to pay registration fees every year. Oh no! (And it appears to only disallow the names, not anything which contains the names, so ieft-sucks.com would be fine.)
ICANN already owns all the single-digit domains, and the double-digit domains are probably all held by cybersquatters, so I just don't see this as something to be outraged about. -- Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies.
Microsoft people admit you need to know what you are doing to make Windows work. You need to memoerize commands and fiddle with config files.. or at least one big config file.
To much much lesser extend than Unix... you can set up Windows 2000 server, set up multiple network cards, set up a couple of virtual web servers, set up SQL Server, set up a couple of databases, set up a NAT server, DNS, DHCP, install Office, run Quake in OpenGL all on one machine all using the same "follow the wizards, right click on something to get its properties dialogue box" methodology. And (believe it or not) you could do all that without requiring a reboot.
No learning what packages are required for each task, no learning where the config files and how to set them for each task, no manually stopping and restarting services (and thus having to remember how to do so) to reload config files, no surfing around trying to figure out if any of the GUI Apache configurators is any good, no learning about "inetd" and how it relates to everything else, etc, etc.
Not that, individually, any of those tasks are terribly difficult, but each one requires more effort than just right-clicking and getting a dialogue box with all the properties you need.
And most of the time, "it just works." And, yes, when setting up more complicated installations and when things go wrong, you've sometimes got to learn how to edit the registry... but most of the time that just requires finding an MS Knowledge Base article or Google News message and following the instructions. And when things go really wrong, or get really complicated or overloaded, you're screwed, because you don't have the low-level access and understanding that Unix gives you... but them's the trade-offs. But I would certainly dispute that Windows isn't initially friendlier than Linux (in its current state... Linux is, of course, getting better every day). -- Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies.
"In everything do to others as you would have them do to you..." -- Matthew 7:12, NRS Translation
It's actually not all-purpose a philosphy as one might think... what people *like* varies enormously. The inverse holds up a bit better as a general-purpose philosphy... "Don't do unto others as you wouldn't want them to do to you."
In any case, that philosophy doesn't work very well when applied to software, since the range of what people want varies enormously... some (the "Microsoft people") want everything there now, want it easy to maintain and setup just by clicking a few dialogs, don't want to fiddle with config files or memorize commands, and are willing to put up bugs in order to get those features. Others (the "UNIX people") are willing to fiddle with configurations, memorize commands, and sometimes wait for features in order to feel they're bug-free. And the range of taste in between those two options is enormous...
Best example of that is probably game support, and OS and beta driver quirks people are willing to put up with for a few more frames per second. -- Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies.
Religion is based on faith. Science is based on *trust*. There's a big difference.
With science, we know there's the scientific method, peer review, etc. We know that the scientific method has led to concrete manifestations: cars, nuclear power, electricity, medicine. We trust that these same principals are being applied to domains we don't know about or cannot directly see... so we may understand how an electric circuit work, but trust the scientist who's specialty is life sciences.
We also trust that all possible considerations all considered... there's vigorous debate on various hypothesis, all possible explanations are consdered, and whatever explanations survives the debate is considered the most likely to be true... until more evidence is considered and weighed against the hypothesis.
Hence your statement like "They have never considered the possible effect of a single catastrophic event, such as the Flood, in creating rock formations like the Grand Canyon" is false. Of course they have (for instance, I saw something the other day about how a single catastrophic flood may have formed the Dead Sea, and it could be the flood described in the Bible, as it was big enough the appear to be the whole world to the people in the area), but the evidence points to the millions of years explanation for formation of geologic features like the Grand Canyon.
Faith, on the other hand, generally doesn't have evidence or factual challenges: instead of "believe this because it's based on the same principals that have given us other scientific explanations which are verified" it says "believe this because I believe it, your ancestor's believe it, and it's true." And instead of the evidence driving the explanations, the evidence is twisted to fit the explanations. -- Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies.
Re:VCRs allow me to skip commericals too -- so wha
on
Calling Out TiVo
·
· Score: 1
>>In fact, after recording, my VCR rewinds and marks the commercials using some complicated algorithm.
I once found a website that explained how that Commercial Advance works... the VCR basically just looks for black frames about 30 seconds apart. Simple concept, probably more difficult to implement, and damn does work well, huh? I officially gave it the title of "coolest thing ever" when I first saw it working...
-- Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies.
Y'know, when things like that get a 5, it really brings into question the whole moderation scheme here.... -- Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies.
Of couse, looking for information on the Internet at the typical public library will result in a brilliant discourse on the state of the Internet circa 1972. If one wants up-to-date information (as would be necessary on a topic like the Internet) the typical library would be useful only for its free access to the Internet.
-- Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies.
From what I've read, the upcoming Palomino won't provide that much of an improvement (ie. it will allow Athlons to reach 2GHz), and Thoroughbred is largely an unknown.
And since there are versions of Linux and Windows already working for Itanium, I think it might actually show up this year... I just don't see Sledgehammer catching on. It's hacking on of 64-bit instructions on to the x86 instruction set is apparently awkward and doesn't solve most of x86's problems. (I'm taking other people's words on that as my assembly experience is limited...) Seems to me it's like the way Win9x hacks 32-bit code onto a 16-bit operating system. I think it's about time we move beyond decades-old instruction sets and Intel's the only one with the clout to do it for the mainstream PC world.
But hey, I could be wrong. But I think in a year AMD's going to be suttering to keep up with Intel the way Intel is stuttering to keep up with AMD right now. -- Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies.
Pentium 4 has Version 1.0 problems...
on
Pentium IV study
·
· Score: 1
...because it is the first generation of a redesign. It's kinda like the Pentium Pro, which led to the Pentium II's and III's.
The P4 is just meant for early adopters... Athlon's probably going to be ahead on price/performance until the.13 micron P4 comes out with higher clocks speeds and bigger cache (and a wide range of new versions of software which take advantage of the P4 extensions).
Athlon's approaching the highest clock rates it'll manage (it might make 2GHz, but will probably need a freon-based cooling system), much like the barrier P3 hit at 1GHz... Pentium 4's clock rates are just beginning. Combine that with Intel's generally better record in terms of motherboard chipsets, and I think AMD's time in the sun will be over in a year or two... -- Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies.
MIR2 has been around for a while...
on
Mir 2
·
· Score: 3
...so these plans are likely 10 years old, and probably look somwhat like the Russian part of ISS, since that's what the Russian part of ISS was based on. Notice his comments about the insufficient power... hence the (way behind schedule) Russian Science and Power Platform on ISS. (For the curious, the best reference I've seen on the Russian side of ISS is http://www.russianspaceweb.com.)
It's unfortunate the Russians can't get behind the ISS from a national pride point of view. I get the warm fuzzies when I think that this thing might actually work out... the next mission, going up April 19th, has Americans, a Russian, a Canadian, and an Italian going up... if this keeps up, maybe we'll finally be able to get rid of these stupid tribal sensibilities that have kept people at war for thousands of years...
Of course, that's probably against human nature. Oh well... -- Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies.
>>Mass fractions are all you have to look at to wonder why Single Stage To Orbit [SSTO] is some perverted NASA priority.
I read that when they cancelled of X-33 (Venturestar), NASA decided SSTO isn't feasible with the current level of technology and is officially looking for a two-stage solution for their next generation launch vehicle.
Most of the technology they developed with the X-33 program should still be useful, though, so I wouldn't call it a waste... -- Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies.
What they're talking about there isn't ads that interrupt the game; they're talking about product placement, which is done in movies all the time.
So, short answer: yes.;)
Online games, like You Don't Know Jack, are free, but interrupted by advertisements like a tv show. -- Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies.
I think it's probably more related to the Russian ground crews... apparently there were significant problems with them. Partially because they only had limited windows to communicate with them, partially attitude and language differences.
The evidence points to the astronauts and cosmonauts getting along great. They're just too well-adjusted, smart and reasonable to have petty conflicts - or at least to write about them in the logs.;) -- Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies.
...they appear not to be using a mail server, but instead they seem to be sending/receiving it by transmitting.OST files (which is Outlook's internal binary storage format for all the e-mail messages), which presumeable get opened in Outlook on the ground, dealt with (send messages in Outbox, recieve new messages), and sent back up. That's what I've picked up from the logs, anyway.
Sounds like a hack to me - guess they didn't want to set up a real server. I really wish NASA would post details on how this whole network thing works so we could properly dis it.;)
-- Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies.
My best guess is they're using Solaris.
From the Dec logs...
"Sergei swapped hard disks from Russian Laptop #2 to the operating laptop on the central post. It is back in working order. However, we do not have a backup for the Solaris/Unix OS which gave us the problem and we are operating on our only working load. We request that 4A bring at least one complete hard drive as a backup for the Russian laptop."
...
"Approx 1930 experienced a "crash" with the Russian PCS laptop. Attempting to reboot the PC gave indication that the Sun OS would not load. Boot s/w can not read root directory correctly. Even Sergei didn't understand this one. Talked with TsUP and decided to wait for specialist advice tomorrow." -- Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies.
They're having difficulties with the mail server, file server, configuring the laptops?
I mean, if I'm preparing a server and some laptops for, like, a trade show or something, I'm making sure everything's setup, working, and that all that has to be done on site is plugging the buggers in. I find it amazing that the space crews have to worry about reconfiguring the things. I guess they're getting software update, but programs with the mail and file servers? No matter what the OS, there's those no reason for those to be wonky.
I'm going to guess that a lot of the problems have to do with the lack of contact with the ground - for most of Expedition One, they only had sporatic contact with the Russian ground crew - now that the Destiny module is installed, they should have constant contact with the Houston. So hopefully the ground can log in and reconfigure the servers and whatnot remotely without the crew having to "wrestle with UNIX commands."
-- Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies.
>> Actually, YOU could buy compnents and put whatever OS you wanted on them. My mom and most of America can't.
Well, your mom and most of america wouldn't care which OS they bought. And if they did, they could get one without Windows. It would be more difficult, but not impossible.
My point is, you shouldn't have a lawsuit because buying a computer with another OS is more difficult, only if it was impossible... which it wasn't (except perhaps in the case of laptops). -- Assume that there are valid arguments against your position.
That's a good point. Laptops are much more difficult to buy from mom-and-pops type computer shops - I have seen them, but even they might have required an MS operating system. Certainly they would be much harder to find than desktops. -- Assume that there are valid arguments against your position.
There's never been a time that you couldn't buy a computer without Windows... Sure, if you wanted a Dell, you had to get Windows, but you probably also had to get Brand X hard drive and Brand Y motherboard. Bundling is a common practice in most businesses. But big name brands aren't the only companies out there, and you could always buy machines made with quality components to put whatever OS you wanted on them.
IMHO, the cases will fail. Doesn't mean they won't drag out and give the lawyers on both sides lots of money, though... -- Assume that there are valid arguments against your position.
And another thing - MS attitude to Linux in terms of porting applications to Linux: Microsoft is porting their MSIE and Windows media player to Solaris and HP/UX - why not to Linux? We both know that by any count you have more Linux workstations then there are Sun's and HP Unix workstations COMBINED! so why not port your MSIE and Windows media player to Linux? if you already ported it to other unices - it wouldn't be that hard to move it further along to Linux. Even the GUI stuff can be ported with QT Libraries
Linux is not generally used for corporate workstations (CAD and the like). Solaris and HP/UX (I think) are. The main point of those particular UNIX ports are to encourage corporate adoption of Microsoft intranet solutions. -- Assume that there are valid arguments against your position.
Slashdot Mirror
...it's what I do for ICQ, and works pretty much perfectly. If people need to reach you and they're not on your list, e-mail and phone calls and fax (all of which provide enough spam to last a lifetime) will do...
--
Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies.
Possible explanation: New countries are popping up all the time. Are only countries which exist in the 1990's (or whenever) allowed to have their own domain?
--
Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies.
ICANN already owns all the single-digit domains, and the double-digit domains are probably all held by cybersquatters, so I just don't see this as something to be outraged about.
--
Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies.
To much much lesser extend than Unix... you can set up Windows 2000 server, set up multiple network cards, set up a couple of virtual web servers, set up SQL Server, set up a couple of databases, set up a NAT server, DNS, DHCP, install Office, run Quake in OpenGL all on one machine all using the same "follow the wizards, right click on something to get its properties dialogue box" methodology. And (believe it or not) you could do all that without requiring a reboot.
No learning what packages are required for each task, no learning where the config files and how to set them for each task, no manually stopping and restarting services (and thus having to remember how to do so) to reload config files, no surfing around trying to figure out if any of the GUI Apache configurators is any good, no learning about "inetd" and how it relates to everything else, etc, etc.
Not that, individually, any of those tasks are terribly difficult, but each one requires more effort than just right-clicking and getting a dialogue box with all the properties you need.
And most of the time, "it just works." And, yes, when setting up more complicated installations and when things go wrong, you've sometimes got to learn how to edit the registry... but most of the time that just requires finding an MS Knowledge Base article or Google News message and following the instructions. And when things go really wrong, or get really complicated or overloaded, you're screwed, because you don't have the low-level access and understanding that Unix gives you... but them's the trade-offs. But I would certainly dispute that Windows isn't initially friendlier than Linux (in its current state... Linux is, of course, getting better every day).
--
Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies.
It's actually not all-purpose a philosphy as one might think... what people *like* varies enormously. The inverse holds up a bit better as a general-purpose philosphy... "Don't do unto others as you wouldn't want them to do to you."
In any case, that philosophy doesn't work very well when applied to software, since the range of what people want varies enormously... some (the "Microsoft people") want everything there now, want it easy to maintain and setup just by clicking a few dialogs, don't want to fiddle with config files or memorize commands, and are willing to put up bugs in order to get those features. Others (the "UNIX people") are willing to fiddle with configurations, memorize commands, and sometimes wait for features in order to feel they're bug-free. And the range of taste in between those two options is enormous...
Best example of that is probably game support, and OS and beta driver quirks people are willing to put up with for a few more frames per second.
--
Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies.
http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1003-200-5753893.html? tag=lthd
--
Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies.
Religion is based on faith. Science is based on *trust*. There's a big difference.
With science, we know there's the scientific method, peer review, etc. We know that the scientific method has led to concrete manifestations: cars, nuclear power, electricity, medicine. We trust that these same principals are being applied to domains we don't know about or cannot directly see... so we may understand how an electric circuit work, but trust the scientist who's specialty is life sciences.
We also trust that all possible considerations all considered... there's vigorous debate on various hypothesis, all possible explanations are consdered, and whatever explanations survives the debate is considered the most likely to be true... until more evidence is considered and weighed against the hypothesis.
Hence your statement like "They have never considered the possible effect of a single catastrophic event, such as the Flood, in creating rock formations like the Grand Canyon" is false. Of course they have (for instance, I saw something the other day about how a single catastrophic flood may have formed the Dead Sea, and it could be the flood described in the Bible, as it was big enough the appear to be the whole world to the people in the area), but the evidence points to the millions of years explanation for formation of geologic features like the Grand Canyon.
Faith, on the other hand, generally doesn't have evidence or factual challenges: instead of "believe this because it's based on the same principals that have given us other scientific explanations which are verified" it says "believe this because I believe it, your ancestor's believe it, and it's true." And instead of the evidence driving the explanations, the evidence is twisted to fit the explanations.
--
Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies.
>>In fact, after recording, my VCR rewinds and marks the commercials using some complicated algorithm.
I once found a website that explained how that Commercial Advance works... the VCR basically just looks for black frames about 30 seconds apart. Simple concept, probably more difficult to implement, and damn does work well, huh? I officially gave it the title of "coolest thing ever" when I first saw it working...
--
Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies.
Y'know, when things like that get a 5, it really brings into question the whole moderation scheme here....
--
Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies.
Of couse, looking for information on the Internet at the typical public library will result in a brilliant discourse on the state of the Internet circa 1972. If one wants up-to-date information (as would be necessary on a topic like the Internet) the typical library would be useful only for its free access to the Internet.
--
Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies.
From what I've read, the upcoming Palomino won't provide that much of an improvement (ie. it will allow Athlons to reach 2GHz), and Thoroughbred is largely an unknown.
And since there are versions of Linux and Windows already working for Itanium, I think it might actually show up this year... I just don't see Sledgehammer catching on. It's hacking on of 64-bit instructions on to the x86 instruction set is apparently awkward and doesn't solve most of x86's problems. (I'm taking other people's words on that as my assembly experience is limited...) Seems to me it's like the way Win9x hacks 32-bit code onto a 16-bit operating system. I think it's about time we move beyond decades-old instruction sets and Intel's the only one with the clout to do it for the mainstream PC world.
But hey, I could be wrong. But I think in a year AMD's going to be suttering to keep up with Intel the way Intel is stuttering to keep up with AMD right now.
--
Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies.
...because it is the first generation of a redesign. It's kinda like the Pentium Pro, which led to the Pentium II's and III's.
.13 micron P4 comes out with higher clocks speeds and bigger cache (and a wide range of new versions of software which take advantage of the P4 extensions).
The P4 is just meant for early adopters... Athlon's probably going to be ahead on price/performance until the
Athlon's approaching the highest clock rates it'll manage (it might make 2GHz, but will probably need a freon-based cooling system), much like the barrier P3 hit at 1GHz... Pentium 4's clock rates are just beginning. Combine that with Intel's generally better record in terms of motherboard chipsets, and I think AMD's time in the sun will be over in a year or two...
--
Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies.
...so these plans are likely 10 years old, and probably look somwhat like the Russian part of ISS, since that's what the Russian part of ISS was based on. Notice his comments about the insufficient power... hence the (way behind schedule) Russian Science and Power Platform on ISS. (For the curious, the best reference I've seen on the Russian side of ISS is http://www.russianspaceweb.com.)
It's unfortunate the Russians can't get behind the ISS from a national pride point of view. I get the warm fuzzies when I think that this thing might actually work out... the next mission, going up April 19th, has Americans, a Russian, a Canadian, and an Italian going up... if this keeps up, maybe we'll finally be able to get rid of these stupid tribal sensibilities that have kept people at war for thousands of years...
Of course, that's probably against human nature. Oh well...
--
Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies.
>>Mass fractions are all you have to look at to wonder why Single Stage To Orbit [SSTO] is some perverted NASA priority.
I read that when they cancelled of X-33 (Venturestar), NASA decided SSTO isn't feasible with the current level of technology and is officially looking for a two-stage solution for their next generation launch vehicle.
Most of the technology they developed with the X-33 program should still be useful, though, so I wouldn't call it a waste...
--
Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies.
Um... score 3, informative?
;)
methinks someone didn't get it...
--
Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies.
What they're talking about there isn't ads that interrupt the game; they're talking about product placement, which is done in movies all the time.
;)
So, short answer: yes.
Online games, like You Don't Know Jack, are free, but interrupted by advertisements like a tv show.
--
Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies.
Hardware failures, I can certainly understand. But there seemed to be a lot of mucking around with software, which seems less acceptable.
--
Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies.
I think it's probably more related to the Russian ground crews... apparently there were significant problems with them. Partially because they only had limited windows to communicate with them, partially attitude and language differences.
;)
The evidence points to the astronauts and cosmonauts getting along great. They're just too well-adjusted, smart and reasonable to have petty conflicts - or at least to write about them in the logs.
--
Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies.
...they appear not to be using a mail server, but instead they seem to be sending/receiving it by transmitting .OST files (which is Outlook's internal binary storage format for all the e-mail messages), which presumeable get opened in Outlook on the ground, dealt with (send messages in Outbox, recieve new messages), and sent back up. That's what I've picked up from the logs, anyway.
;)
Sounds like a hack to me - guess they didn't want to set up a real server. I really wish NASA would post details on how this whole network thing works so we could properly dis it.
--
Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies.
My best guess is they're using Solaris.
From the Dec logs...
"Sergei swapped hard disks from Russian Laptop #2 to the operating laptop on the central post. It is back in working order. However, we do not have a backup for the Solaris/Unix OS which gave us the problem and we are operating on our only working load. We request that 4A bring at least one complete hard drive as a backup for the Russian laptop."
...
"Approx 1930 experienced a "crash" with the Russian PCS laptop. Attempting to reboot the PC gave indication that the Sun OS would not load. Boot s/w can not read root directory correctly. Even Sergei didn't understand this one. Talked with TsUP and decided to wait for specialist advice tomorrow."
--
Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies.
They're having difficulties with the mail server, file server, configuring the laptops?
I mean, if I'm preparing a server and some laptops for, like, a trade show or something, I'm making sure everything's setup, working, and that all that has to be done on site is plugging the buggers in. I find it amazing that the space crews have to worry about reconfiguring the things. I guess they're getting software update, but programs with the mail and file servers? No matter what the OS, there's those no reason for those to be wonky.
I'm going to guess that a lot of the problems have to do with the lack of contact with the ground - for most of Expedition One, they only had sporatic contact with the Russian ground crew - now that the Destiny module is installed, they should have constant contact with the Houston. So hopefully the ground can log in and reconfigure the servers and whatnot remotely without the crew having to "wrestle with UNIX commands."
--
Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies.
>> Actually, YOU could buy compnents and put whatever OS you wanted on them. My mom and most of America can't.
Well, your mom and most of america wouldn't care which OS they bought. And if they did, they could get one without Windows. It would be more difficult, but not impossible.
My point is, you shouldn't have a lawsuit because buying a computer with another OS is more difficult, only if it was impossible... which it wasn't (except perhaps in the case of laptops).
--
Assume that there are valid arguments against your position.
That's a good point. Laptops are much more difficult to buy from mom-and-pops type computer shops - I have seen them, but even they might have required an MS operating system. Certainly they would be much harder to find than desktops.
--
Assume that there are valid arguments against your position.
There's never been a time that you couldn't buy a computer without Windows... Sure, if you wanted a Dell, you had to get Windows, but you probably also had to get Brand X hard drive and Brand Y motherboard. Bundling is a common practice in most businesses. But big name brands aren't the only companies out there, and you could always buy machines made with quality components to put whatever OS you wanted on them.
IMHO, the cases will fail. Doesn't mean they won't drag out and give the lawyers on both sides lots of money, though...
--
Assume that there are valid arguments against your position.
And another thing - MS attitude to Linux in terms of porting applications to Linux: Microsoft is porting their MSIE and Windows media player to Solaris and HP/UX - why not to Linux? We both know that by any count you have more Linux workstations then there are Sun's and HP Unix workstations COMBINED! so why not port your MSIE and Windows media player to Linux? if you already ported it to other unices - it wouldn't be that hard to move it further along to Linux. Even the GUI stuff can be ported with QT Libraries
Linux is not generally used for corporate workstations (CAD and the like). Solaris and HP/UX (I think) are. The main point of those particular UNIX ports are to encourage corporate adoption of Microsoft intranet solutions.
--
Assume that there are valid arguments against your position.