I'm not sure what the exact Latin translation is, but Xiphophorus is (or was) the genus name of several species of live-bearing toothcarps from the Yucatan peninsula. Specifically, the sword-tails and platys.
A common tropical fish, often found in community fresh-water tanks, before everyone in the world decided to switch to reef tanks.
Well, I'm glad I'm not the only person getting tired of having the (preferred) pronunciation given with every single mention of the languages name: C# (pronounced see sharp). Ugh. How about Java (pronounced Java), C (pronounced see), Eiffel (eye full), Pascal (pascal), perl (perl). No explanation needed there!
Anytime you come up with a name where you have to explain the pronunciation every time you use it, you know that its a real lamer. Its a dead give-away that you worked too hard, stayed up too late, and got too cute.
Of course, there _are_ lots of ways to say C#. I always think 'hash' everytime I see '#', and if you use the hard sound for the letter C, you get K-hash, or simple Cash. Which I think fits, considering the orifice from which it issued.
Great. Yet another software patent-weilding money grubber. From the HushMail FAQ page:
HushMail implements patent-pending technology known as a "Public Key Cryptosystem with Roaming User Capability." That means that the only people who can read your HushMail are the people that you send it to. It also means that you can access your account from any computer that has a Web browser and Internet access, anywhere in the world! Remember that you can use your HushMail account to send email to anyone on the planet, but to take advantage of our 1024-bit encryption, all parties sending and receiving email must be using HushMail.
So to be useful, you just have to get all of your corresponents to also use HushMail. Right. Forget about all the existing PGP users. And how can you get a patent for something that is already widely available? Why all you have to do is tack 'Roaming User' onto the end of the description and Poof! The software patent fairy grants your wish. Watch out world, I got a patent so I can sue your ass off if I feel like it!
This guy is a BLITHERING IDIOT! This is either a hoax, or the standards for IETF submissions have drastically dropped while I was vacationing on LV426.
I believe what he is trying to wrap his puny brain around is Classless Internet Domain Routing, or CIDR. This is the big workaround that was put in place a while back to extend the life of the IPv4 protocol. CIDR basically allows for variable length subnet masks from 8 to 30 bits in length. The old classful method, 'IPv4 Classic', had only three possible subnet masks: 8, 16, or 24 bits, which correspond to Class A (255.0.0.0), Class B (255.255.0.0), and Class C (255.255.255.0). Since there were only these three netmask options, and since most people have a hard time with hex numbers, the 'dotted quad' IP number notation was invented. This made it easy for a human person to 'mask' off the network portion of an IP address in their head, i.e. 87.129.44.66 is network 87, host 129.44.66. Or more likely, network 87, subnet 129.44, host 66. While this worked great for binary-impaired humans, it really brutalized the 32-bit IP address space. The smallest network that could be created could support 254 hosts, so if your donut store only has four servers and twenty workstations, then you just wasted 230 IP addresses.
With CIDR, you can use a 27-bit netmask that will support up to 30 hosts. The relation between X and Y, where X is the number of netmask bits needed and Y is the number of IP addresses needed, is: Y = 2^(32-X)-2
8 bit netmask => 2^24-2 => 16777214 hosts (Class A)
9 => 2^23-2 => 8388696
10 => 2^22-2 => 4194302
11 => 2^21-2 => 2097150
12 => 2^20-2 => 1048574
13 => 2^19-2 => 524286
14 => 2^18-2 => 262142
15 => 2^17-2 => 131070
16 => 2^16-2 => 65534 (Class B)
17 => 2^15-2 => 32766
18 => 2^14-2 => 16382
19 => 2^13-2 => 8190
20 => 2^12-2 => 4094
21 => 2^11-2 => 2046
22 => 2^10-2 => 1022
23 => 2^9-2 => 510
24 => 2^8-2 => 254 (Class C)
25 => 2^7-2 => 126
26 => 2^6-2 => 62
27 => 2^5-2 => 30
28 => 2^4-2 => 14
29 => 2^3-2 => 6
30 => 2^2-2 => 2
Thus, using CIDR, your ISP can allocate just enough IP addresses to suit each customer's needs, at least to within the next highest power of two.
The other technique that is widely used to preserve IP addresses is the use of Network Address Translation, NAT, a.k.a. masquerading, in conjunction with private IP network addresses. Using this scheme allows one to use a very minimal external IP range, i.e. 27 or 28 bit netmask, to support any number of internal hosts.
An ISP switch should take a maximum of 4 hours, and that includes remapping IP addresses of the servers on your DMZ and reconfiguring your router to the new ISP.
If you use network address translation (masquerading) and internal (10.x.x.x) IP addresses, then NO CHANGES are needed internally when changing ISPs.
All workstations and most servers should be using DHCP to allocate IP addresses and download net mask, domain name, etc.
The DNS servers should use Dynamic DNS to resolve host names to DHCP-allocated IP addresses.
By letting himself be abused in this manner, he is lowering the standards of a suitable work environment for everybody in this industry.
If this guy was really so smart, he could find a real job doing the same type of work on a normal 8 to 10 hours a day, 5 days a week schedule. For MORE money. Quality is in demand.
He is running himself into an early grave, as he himself testifies.
He has no life outside of work. Ugh.
He is confusing spinning his wheels with moving fast. Its the MPH that count, not RPMs.
I have GD 1.3, which I assume was a current version. It came with MRTG, an SNMP-based traffic monitor that I have put in place at my company. Quoting the GD readme.txt:
Non-LZW-based GIF compression code Version 1.3 contains GIF compression code that uses simple Run Length Encoding instead of LZW compression, while still retaining compatibility with normal LZW-based GIF decoders (your browser will still like your GIFs). LZW compression is patented by Unisys. This is why there have been no new versions of gd for a long time. THANKS to Hutchison Avenue Software Corporation for contributing this code. THE NEW CODE PRODUCES LARGER GIFS AND IS NOT WELL SUITED TO PHOTOGRAPHIC IMAGES. THIS IS A LEGAL ISSUE. IT IS NOT A QUESTION OF TECHNICAL SKILL. PLEASE DON'T COMPLAIN ABOUT THE SIZE OF GIF OUTPUT. THANKS!
So this must be some other copyright issue besides LZW. And besides, if the problem was with LZW it would be a patent issue, not copyright.
I know most of you kiddies have watched the reruns and the movie series, but I am proud to say that I am old enough to have seen the originals during their orignal NBC broadcasts. I remember one evening starting an argument with my older sister. I wanted to watch Bonanza, and she wanted to watch something else. Of course she won, but I won too. After seeing that first episode, "The Incredible Salt-Sucking Alien Vampire", you couldn't pry me away from the set with a crowbar.
Later, during the seventies, my friends and I would lament ST's passing, while at the same time rejoicing at being able to watch the reruns five days a week. Bittersweet it was.
Once, I even went to a ST convention when it was in town. And you thing Linux geeks are strange! Everyone should go to one of those. But just one. Any more that than and you have a serious problem.
Anyway, I guess we all knew that the actors were getting old. Really old. (Sorry priceline:) Kelley was definitely the third leg that provided stability and humor in an otherwise overly self-important universe. He will be missed.
Number 4 had the best combination of humor, action, reasonable plausibility, relevance, and character development. And unlike most sequels/prequels/series, the action in IV picked up right where III left off.
Plus, who can ever top the line, "He took too much LDS back in the '60s"!?;^)
That is what the question should be. Not 'What could have happened', not 'What might he have done with the source', not 'I potentially lost millions', not 'My source code is so secret and important to me that I would be out of business without it, so he owes me BILLIONS.'
You have to distinguish between actual damages and potential damages. That's why there's a big difference between driving irresponsibly and getting a traffic citation, and driving irresponsibly, causing a major accident, and killing several innocent victims. One is a misdemeanor, and the other gets you hard time in the slammer.
Fuck the lawyers. Well, maybe not.
BTW, I have that Dilbert cartoon, framed and hanging on the wall of my cell^H^H^Hubicle.
Microsoft couldn't kill Sun's ISO application outright, but they did have enough leverage to get the ISO committee to change the rules that apply to Publicly Available Specification submitter, or PAS, organizations. Initially, ISO created the PAS program so that hot new technology could be quickly standardized and submitted to ISO by the creator of the technology, instead of by the decades of committee wrangling that normally accompanies an international standardization effort. Witness C, C++, Fortran, etc. As a PAS participant, a company would drive the development of the new standard, with oversight and approval of the ISO subcommittee for that standard. While others would be free to implement their own compatible version of the PAS initiated standard, only the PAS submitter would be able to initiate changes in the standard, with the committee's approval of course.
Microsoft applied pressure behind the scenes and got ISO to change the rules for PAS submitters so that once the technology had been submitted and approved, all control would be handed over to the ISO subcommittee. Sun, of course, has said from the beginning that they would always maintain control of Java(TM) and would vigorously defend it against all who would try to wrest control from them. As indeed they have.
And now that ISO has changed the PAS rules to force Sun to either relinquish control of Java(TM), or drop the ISO standardization effort, Sun has chosen the path that is consistent with their stated goals of retaining control of the evolution of Java(TM), one of the most important new technologies of the Internet era. Bye bye, ISO.
I agree with Sun's position, especially in light of the fact that the rules were changed out from under them in a sneaky back-room deal.
Java(TM) will continue to evolve. Sun does need to a better job of public relations, and to help more people implement Java(TM) for their platforms of choice. While I agree that a GPL'd implementation would be best, I don't expect Sun to just throw in the towel and give up its control. They are way too 'corporate' for that. From a Sun shareholders perspective, that would be the equivalent of flushing money down the tubes. And lots of it.
Well, they refer to "the metaphor of water, H20" in the article, but all of the abbreviations are 'H20', H-two-zero. However, the URL is 'h2o', so which is it?
We wouldn't want to confuse the basis of life on Earth with a bad slasher flick (Halloween 20 - H20).;^)
I had posted the following comment to Linux Today regarding this article on JWZ's resignation from Mozilla.org. It think it is also relevant here.
It seems to me that a large part of the motivation for a free software contributor is the license under which the software is released. While Netscape was the first big-name corporation to release the source code to an important product, they were also the first to come up with a non-free open source license. There are still some ties to the corporation that birthed it, so contributors are basically unpaid developers for said corporation. If Netscape used the GPL instead of NPL, they may have attracted more outside developers. Many people enjoy contributing to the public good for free, but few enjoy lining the pockets of the stockholders for free.
I believe this issue will also haunt all of the other 'open-source' but not quite free software that is being made available on the net. These include Apple's APSL, Sun's CSL, TrollTech's new QT license, etc. Any license that even mentions the corporate donor/supporter will be shunned by free software developers everywhere.
I agree with many of Z's other conclusions, especially the fact that Netscape did not release the source code to a working, usable product. As a programmer, one definitely likes to see tangible results, not just X more lines of source in version control.
Finally, while the difficulties of Mozilla.org should not deter other companies from taking similar directions, others should definitely learn from their mistakes. Learn from the pioneers how to avoid the arrows in the back.
That's all this is. Microsoft, champion of the downtrodden and friend to the poor, would never do such a vile thing. Microsoft has always been honest and completely above board. They have never lied to anyone about their ultimate plans for total world hegemony, and the elimination of all possible competition in all possible markets of all possible types of computers and media.;^)
Seriously, though, I think raising these second hand rumours to the level of a/. headline is probably uncalled for and unproductive. People who would believe it already hate MS/Borg, and people who won't believe it are already totally supportive of MS, the last defender of innovation in the computer marketplace.
When I want slanted news stories and unsubstantiated rumours presented as fact, I already know where to go. (Hint: Starts with 'ZD'.)
Europa is one of Saturn's moons, silly.
on
OSI vs Taco Bell
·
· Score: 1
It was named after some Greek goddess or other. And while Europa was not named after Europe, I guess they could both have been named after the same mythical figure.
... in my First Post(TM) that got deleted somehow, this sucks. It seems that everytime you turn around, the lobbyist are getting some lame new law passed to protect the vested interests with deep pockets. Who is there to protect the rights of the little guy? Not the Democrats, Hollywood/RIAA has them in their pockets. Not the Republicans, no matter what they say, they are looking out for the big businesses. Not the Libertarians, cuz they can't get elected. We're just SOL.
Pretty soon, when everything in America is made into a crime, only criminals will live in America.
I would consider the Internet as a good example of concrete proof that open-source methodologies work better than CMM or any other proprietary whiz-bang methodology-du-jour. Nothing is more open than an RFC or its reference implementation.
You guys are way to harsh. Yourdon's first book was a wake up call to the industry, and anyone who was around at the time knows it. The fact that many of his predictions didn't come true reinforces the idea that his first book had good value as a cautionary tale. It got many people to change the way they looked at their careers, to get off their butts and do something before the worst case scenario came true.
Just because you have a bad case of 'pony tail guru' envy doesn't mean you can't do something about it. No one is stopping you from getting out there and writing the next big gloom-and-doom best seller. Go for it!
Most high-end SCSI controllers sport two or three independent busses, each of which can control up to 15 devices. You can add as many adapters as your PC can handle (slots/IRQs/DMA etc). And yes, the drives can be hot pluggable for a price. And yes, I'll pit my server with 30 Ultra2 SCSI drives against your Mac with 63 FireWire drives any day of the week. Assuming you or I had either one.;^)
According to the Seagate spec sheet (insert grain of salt here), the Cheetah drives can deliver data to the bus at speeds of 14.5 to 21.3 MBytes per second, approximately 116 to 170 MBits per second. In a server environment where you have eight or ten drives chugging away on one bus, servicing requests from hundreds of different users, the excess bus speed gets used up in a hurry. And it doesn't have to be a 'crazy' RAID 5 setup, either. Any heavily used server with more than one drive will benefit from the bus speed being higher than the drives' speed.
And of course, a single drive can't pump data through a slow FireWire bus any faster than it can a fast SCSI bus.;^)
Firewire sounds so fast because of the way they quote the transfer speeds. Since Firewire is a serial protocol, they use Mega Bits per second. And since SCSI is a parallel bus, SCSI speeds are quoted in Mega Bytes per second.
Currently available FireWire: ----------------------------------------------- Standard : 12.5 MBytes/sec: 100 Mbits/sec High Perf. : 25 MBytes/sec : 200 Mbits/sec
So there you can see that the numbers being thrown around regarding FireWires blazing speed can be a little misleading. Today's SCSI drives are much faster than today's FireWire, and will continue to be so in the future. Any time a high performance server is being built, SCSI will remain the storage interface of choice for the forseeable future.
Now if all you want to do is hook up that nifty new camcorder or color scanner to your PC or Mac, FireWire is definitely the way to go.
Slashdot Mirror
A common tropical fish, often found in community fresh-water tanks, before everyone in the world decided to switch to reef tanks.
Anytime you come up with a name where you have to explain the pronunciation every time you use it, you know that its a real lamer. Its a dead give-away that you worked too hard, stayed up too late, and got too cute.
Of course, there _are_ lots of ways to say C#. I always think 'hash' everytime I see '#', and if you use the hard sound for the letter C, you get K-hash, or simple Cash. Which I think fits, considering the orifice from which it issued.
Cheers!
So to be useful, you just have to get all of your corresponents to also use HushMail. Right. Forget about all the existing PGP users. And how can you get a patent for something that is already widely available? Why all you have to do is tack 'Roaming User' onto the end of the description and Poof! The software patent fairy grants your wish. Watch out world, I got a patent so I can sue your ass off if I feel like it!
I believe what he is trying to wrap his puny brain around is Classless Internet Domain Routing, or CIDR. This is the big workaround that was put in place a while back to extend the life of the IPv4 protocol. CIDR basically allows for variable length subnet masks from 8 to 30 bits in length. The old classful method, 'IPv4 Classic', had only three possible subnet masks: 8, 16, or 24 bits, which correspond to Class A (255.0.0.0), Class B (255.255.0.0), and Class C (255.255.255.0). Since there were only these three netmask options, and since most people have a hard time with hex numbers, the 'dotted quad' IP number notation was invented. This made it easy for a human person to 'mask' off the network portion of an IP address in their head, i.e. 87.129.44.66 is network 87, host 129.44.66. Or more likely, network 87, subnet 129.44, host 66. While this worked great for binary-impaired humans, it really brutalized the 32-bit IP address space. The smallest network that could be created could support 254 hosts, so if your donut store only has four servers and twenty workstations, then you just wasted 230 IP addresses.
With CIDR, you can use a 27-bit netmask that will support up to 30 hosts. The relation between X and Y, where X is the number of netmask bits needed and Y is the number of IP addresses needed, is: Y = 2^(32-X)-2
Thus, using CIDR, your ISP can allocate just enough IP addresses to suit each customer's needs, at least to within the next highest power of two.
The other technique that is widely used to preserve IP addresses is the use of Network Address Translation, NAT, a.k.a. masquerading, in conjunction with private IP network addresses. Using this scheme allows one to use a very minimal external IP range, i.e. 27 or 28 bit netmask, to support any number of internal hosts.
- An ISP switch should take a maximum of 4 hours, and that includes remapping IP addresses of the servers on your DMZ and reconfiguring your router to the new ISP.
- If you use network address translation (masquerading) and internal (10.x.x.x) IP addresses, then NO CHANGES are needed internally when changing ISPs.
- All workstations and most servers should be using DHCP to allocate IP addresses and download net mask, domain name, etc.
- The DNS servers should use Dynamic DNS to resolve host names to DHCP-allocated IP addresses.
- By letting himself be abused in this manner, he is lowering the standards of a suitable work environment for everybody in this industry.
- If this guy was really so smart, he could find a real job doing the same type of work on a normal 8 to 10 hours a day, 5 days a week schedule. For MORE money. Quality is in demand.
- He is running himself into an early grave, as he himself testifies.
- He has no life outside of work. Ugh.
- He is confusing spinning his wheels with moving fast. Its the MPH that count, not RPMs.
- Not only is he a whiner, he's a SMUG whiner.
Sometimes, you just gotta know when to say NO!You saw Foo. I saw something else. Funny how the human eye can pick patterns out of a field of randomness.
Later, during the seventies, my friends and I would lament ST's passing, while at the same time rejoicing at being able to watch the reruns five days a week. Bittersweet it was.
Once, I even went to a ST convention when it was in town. And you thing Linux geeks are strange! Everyone should go to one of those. But just one. Any more that than and you have a serious problem.
Anyway, I guess we all knew that the actors were getting old. Really old. (Sorry priceline:) Kelley was definitely the third leg that provided stability and humor in an otherwise overly self-important universe. He will be missed.
Plus, who can ever top the line, "He took too much LDS back in the '60s"!? ;^)
You have to distinguish between actual damages and potential damages. That's why there's a big difference between driving irresponsibly and getting a traffic citation, and driving irresponsibly, causing a major accident, and killing several innocent victims. One is a misdemeanor, and the other gets you hard time in the slammer.
Fuck the lawyers. Well, maybe not.
BTW, I have that Dilbert cartoon, framed and hanging on the wall of my cell^H^H^Hubicle.
Microsoft applied pressure behind the scenes and got ISO to change the rules for PAS submitters so that once the technology had been submitted and approved, all control would be handed over to the ISO subcommittee. Sun, of course, has said from the beginning that they would always maintain control of Java(TM) and would vigorously defend it against all who would try to wrest control from them. As indeed they have.
And now that ISO has changed the PAS rules to force Sun to either relinquish control of Java(TM), or drop the ISO standardization effort, Sun has chosen the path that is consistent with their stated goals of retaining control of the evolution of Java(TM), one of the most important new technologies of the Internet era. Bye bye, ISO.
I agree with Sun's position, especially in light of the fact that the rules were changed out from under them in a sneaky back-room deal.
Java(TM) will continue to evolve. Sun does need to a better job of public relations, and to help more people implement Java(TM) for their platforms of choice. While I agree that a GPL'd implementation would be best, I don't expect Sun to just throw in the towel and give up its control. They are way too 'corporate' for that. From a Sun shareholders perspective, that would be the equivalent of flushing money down the tubes. And lots of it.
We wouldn't want to confuse the basis of life on Earth with a bad slasher flick (Halloween 20 - H20).;^)
It seems to me that a large part of the motivation for a free software contributor is the license under which the software is released. While Netscape was the first big-name corporation to release the source code to an important product, they were also the first to come up with a non-free open source license. There are still some ties to the corporation that birthed it, so contributors are basically unpaid developers for said corporation. If Netscape used the GPL instead of NPL, they may have attracted more outside developers. Many people enjoy contributing to the public good for free, but few enjoy lining the pockets of the stockholders for free.
I believe this issue will also haunt all of the other 'open-source' but not quite free software that is being made available on the net. These include Apple's APSL, Sun's CSL, TrollTech's new QT license, etc. Any license that even mentions the corporate donor/supporter will be shunned by free software developers everywhere.
I agree with many of Z's other conclusions, especially the fact that Netscape did not release the source code to a working, usable product. As a programmer, one definitely likes to see tangible results, not just X more lines of source in version control.
Finally, while the difficulties of Mozilla.org should not deter other companies from taking similar directions, others should definitely learn from their mistakes. Learn from the pioneers how to avoid the arrows in the back.
Cheers.
Aren't you excited now?
Seriously, though, I think raising these second hand rumours to the level of a /. headline is probably uncalled for and unproductive. People who would believe it already hate MS/Borg, and people who won't believe it are already totally supportive of MS, the last defender of innovation in the computer marketplace.
When I want slanted news stories and unsubstantiated rumours presented as fact, I already know where to go. (Hint: Starts with 'ZD'.)
Regards.
Pretty soon, when everything in America is made into a crime, only criminals will live in America.
Not to mention Linux, Apache, etc...
You guys are way to harsh. Yourdon's first book was a wake up call to the industry, and anyone who was around at the time knows it. The fact that many of his predictions didn't come true reinforces the idea that his first book had good value as a cautionary tale. It got many people to change the way they looked at their careers, to get off their butts and do something before the worst case scenario came true.
Just because you have a bad case of 'pony tail guru' envy doesn't mean you can't do something about it. No one is stopping you from getting out there and writing the next big gloom-and-doom best seller. Go for it!
I'm sure you really want your signature to say: "Save a tree. Eat a beaver."
Cheers.
Change SCSI speed references to MBits/sec instead of MBytes/sec. Then we wouldn't hear so much about FireWire's "blazing" speeds.
Who would want crummy old 400Mbps FireWire when you can get 640Mbps Ultra2 SCSI? It's marketing, man. Perception is everything.
Regards.
Regards.
And of course, a single drive can't pump data through a slow FireWire bus any faster than it can a fast SCSI bus. ;^)
Firewire sounds so fast because of the way they quote the transfer speeds. Since Firewire is a serial protocol, they use Mega Bits per second. And since SCSI is a parallel bus, SCSI speeds are quoted in Mega Bytes per second.
Currently available SCSI:
-----------------------------------------------
SCSI-1 : 5 MBytes/sec : 40 Mbits/sec
SCSI-2 : 10 MBytes/sec : 80 Mbits/sec
SCSI-2 Wide : 20 MBytes/sec : 160 Mbits/sec
Ultra Wide : 40 MBytes/sec : 320 Mbits/sec
Ultra2 Wide : 80 MBytes/sec : 640 Mbits/sec
SCSI next year:
-----------------------------------------------
Ultra3 Wide : 160 MBytes/sec : 1280 Mbits/sec
Currently available FireWire:
-----------------------------------------------
Standard : 12.5 MBytes/sec: 100 Mbits/sec
High Perf. : 25 MBytes/sec : 200 Mbits/sec
FireWire next year:
-----------------------------------------------
Higher Perf. : 50 MBytes/sec : 400 Mbits/sec
FireWire some day:
-----------------------------------------------
Ultra Perf. : 150 MBytes/sec : 1200 Mbits/sec
So there you can see that the numbers being thrown around regarding FireWires blazing speed can be a little misleading. Today's SCSI drives are much faster than today's FireWire, and will continue to be so in the future. Any time a high performance server is being built, SCSI will remain the storage interface of choice for the forseeable future.
Now if all you want to do is hook up that nifty new camcorder or color scanner to your PC or Mac, FireWire is definitely the way to go.
Regards.