i'll give you $210,000 so you can do exactly what with your new supercomputer?
also, who will pay your power bills?
i don't get this "drool factor" thing some people have for supercomputers... sure, they're cool and all, but they can do exactly nothing you would want or need to do on a day-to-day basis...
I just bought the 6800 for my FreeBSD box; I'm gonna shove about a half-dozen 100 gig drives in it so I can archive all my live concert recordings in SHN format. The cool thing about these cards is each drive gets its own dedicated controller and they're *real* RAID, none of this fake-ass Promise half-software stuff. I won't have to bother with vinum either.
The question I have for the original poster is: why bother with 160 gig drives when 100s are cheaper, and a bunch of them (or even a few striped pairs) will be a lot faster than a few, much-more-expensive 160 gig drives?
Why doesn't the RIAA just go all the way and charge us all a connection fee? I mean, since we're all obviously thieves, and they can't trust us (hell, we can't copy our own CDs anymore, can we?) why should we be getting away with using our modems, DSL lines, and cable connections without paying the RIAA, to whom we obviously owe some sort of tribute?
Someone set up a domain. "CopyproofCDs.org" or something. Make a list of every copy-proof CD out there.
Then we need to get people to sign up and deliberately go out and buy them.
Here's the fun part.
Once you've bought them and opened them up, return them.
Do this ad nauseum. On your way home from work or school, on the way to the store, or when you're at the mall. Just return a copy. They'll have to throw it out. Ask for another copy of the same album. Bring in a laptop to prove to them that it doesn't play in your computer. What can they do? They HAVE to give you your money back or give you a new copy of the damned CD.
Now, if we get THOUSANDS of people doing this -- and we can, this is slashdot we're talking about -- record companies will soon realize that there's NO money to be made in copy-proof CDs.
Gartner Group is usually not this anti-Microsoft, but given the events of the past week (who DIDN'T get hit by Nimda?), I can see why they're advocating switching, at least for the time being.
At work, we've been on-and-off contemplating switching a lot of our servers from IIS to something else. Our Linux and OpenBSD and Solaris boxes are all fine, but our unpatched IIS servers (the ones I don't admin, go fig) all got trashed. If you're gonna lose a day or two of work every month and you're paying the "cleanup people" $50 an hour or more, you can damn well bet you'll either start looking for new employees or new software.
He had the reporter read the article back to him over the phone, and had her make sure that was exactly the way it'd be printed. It was changed by someone to make it clear that Zimmerman somehow had changed his views on encryption; this is a pretty egregious error, don't you think? A noted encryption expert, and creator of a technology that probably *was* used to mask terrorists' communication, suddenly changes his mind in a national interview...
Hmm, idono about you, but it sounds to me like someone's got an agenda at the Washington Post.
I don't see this as caring or responsible behaviour by the ISP - I see it as unwelcome nannying.
I hope this is a troll, but I fear it is not.
If I leave the fence to my pool open, and my neighbor's kid walks in, falls into the pool, and drowns himself, I am liable not only for civil but also for criminal damages. If my dog gets loose and injures someone, I am also liable. Why, then, if my computer damages others' machines on the internet, should I not be liable for damages?
What I think needs to happen is this: Any owner of an infected netblock needs to be assessed a charge if their computers damage or disrupt traffic on the Internet. The fines should be commensurate with the amount of damage caused. If I'm a major ISP and I own a large netblock that's affected (even if I sell parts of that netblock off), it should be my responsibility to track down the sources of that disturbance within my network and eradicate it, otherwise I should be punished.
I no longer have any tolerance whatsoever for lazy or complacent admins; fines may finally force people to wake the fuck up and secure their goddamned machines and their networks. I mean, come on! Nimda exploits holes in Windows NT and 2000 that are over six months old, and it's done a pretty damned good job of showing me that there are plenty of clueless admins out there! These admins need to be dealt with, they're making life hard for the rest of us.
You call it nannying. I call it being responsible.
b) actually engage the Arab world in something other than warfare. As long as Afghanistan is in a state of near anarchy, and the threat of perpetual starvation hangs over it, terrorist groups are going to have a ready pool of applicants. If you want to overthrow the Taliban, fine. But don't leave another void so another Taliban will come to power. Build up infrastructure, create some sort of economy.
I happen to think this is the best way to go about it too, but I worry that the risks of it, if done improperly, would be worse than what's going on now there... Imagine a nation of *wealthier* pissed-off people?
Folks, this war is going to take a long time. This isn't gonna be over in days or weeks or months, and the resolution is not gonna be on tomorrow's news. Once we find out who these people are and who their superiors are and how everything works (CNN reports that one of the guys we picked up in St. Louis tonight on a train is telling the FBI a lot about that shit), we have to go in and take out the Taliban "government" but do it in a way that doesn't kill many Afghani people, since they're not the ones who did this either. The Taliban is a fundamentalist regime, and those are bad and need to be dealt with. (Look at Iraq for an example of what happens when we don't and/or can't.) Going in and carpet-bombing the country isn't gonna be the way to do it though. I think that's why you haven't heard much about how or when or why we're going to attack parts of Afghanistan (and I firmly believe we will.)
Those who think we can't afford to kill innocent civilians there too, though, please take your rose-tinted glasses off. This isn't grade schoool and everything has a price in the real world. Freedom from the creeping tyranny of terrorism, though -- teaching those people that this is NOT the way to make friends and influence people -- requires some struggle and loss.
I am confident that, in the end, the good will far outweigh the bad in this thing. But it's going to take time.
Slashdot Mirror
i'll give you $210,000 so you can do exactly what with your new supercomputer?
also, who will pay your power bills?
i don't get this "drool factor" thing some people have for supercomputers... sure, they're cool and all, but they can do exactly nothing you would want or need to do on a day-to-day basis...
Wow, glad to see IRC politics have made it to slashdot too.
:D
Any idea when we'll experience a 24-hour period in which Slashdot's database doesn't explode?
- A.P.
Apparently every copy of Windows XP/2000 is now shipping with a pair of scissors, to be used to "secure" the ethernet connection of IIS servers.
- A.P.
The Hindenburg's problem wasn't that it was full of hydrogen; it's the fabric the outer covering was made of that did it in.
Please read up on these things before spouting retardedness.
- A.P.
I just bought the 6800 for my FreeBSD box; I'm gonna shove about a half-dozen 100 gig drives in it so I can archive all my live concert recordings in SHN format. The cool thing about these cards is each drive gets its own dedicated controller and they're *real* RAID, none of this fake-ass Promise half-software stuff. I won't have to bother with vinum either.
The question I have for the original poster is: why bother with 160 gig drives when 100s are cheaper, and a bunch of them (or even a few striped pairs) will be a lot faster than a few, much-more-expensive 160 gig drives?
Why doesn't the RIAA just go all the way and charge us all a connection fee? I mean, since we're all obviously thieves, and they can't trust us (hell, we can't copy our own CDs anymore, can we?) why should we be getting away with using our modems, DSL lines, and cable connections without paying the RIAA, to whom we obviously owe some sort of tribute?
... you mean like slashdot's web-bugs?
- A.P.
Someone set up a domain. "CopyproofCDs.org" or something. Make a list of every copy-proof CD out there.
Then we need to get people to sign up and deliberately go out and buy them.
Here's the fun part.
Once you've bought them and opened them up, return them.
Do this ad nauseum. On your way home from work or school, on the way to the store, or when you're at the mall. Just return a copy. They'll have to throw it out. Ask for another copy of the same album. Bring in a laptop to prove to them that it doesn't play in your computer. What can they do? They HAVE to give you your money back or give you a new copy of the damned CD.
Now, if we get THOUSANDS of people doing this -- and we can, this is slashdot we're talking about -- record companies will soon realize that there's NO money to be made in copy-proof CDs.
Good idea?
If you go to class to surf the web, why the fuck are you even in class?
- A.P.
... can it run Outlook Express?
- A.P.
...is the sound of 10,000 Slashdot moderators opening their dictionaries to learn what the word "pleonasm" means.
Or at least to see if there's a picture of it.
- A.P.
Gartner Group is usually not this anti-Microsoft, but given the events of the past week (who DIDN'T get hit by Nimda?), I can see why they're advocating switching, at least for the time being.
At work, we've been on-and-off contemplating switching a lot of our servers from IIS to something else. Our Linux and OpenBSD and Solaris boxes are all fine, but our unpatched IIS servers (the ones I don't admin, go fig) all got trashed. If you're gonna lose a day or two of work every month and you're paying the "cleanup people" $50 an hour or more, you can damn well bet you'll either start looking for new employees or new software.
- A.P.
Is that like a hores of a different colur?
- A.P.
He had the reporter read the article back to him over the phone, and had her make sure that was exactly the way it'd be printed. It was changed by someone to make it clear that Zimmerman somehow had changed his views on encryption; this is a pretty egregious error, don't you think? A noted encryption expert, and creator of a technology that probably *was* used to mask terrorists' communication, suddenly changes his mind in a national interview...
Hmm, idono about you, but it sounds to me like someone's got an agenda at the Washington Post.
- A.P.
these benifits are offset nicely by the fact you have to run OS X on the damned thing.
Ever use it? It's like driving a speedboat through mud.
I don't see this as caring or responsible behaviour by the ISP - I see it as unwelcome nannying.
I hope this is a troll, but I fear it is not.
If I leave the fence to my pool open, and my neighbor's kid walks in, falls into the pool, and drowns himself, I am liable not only for civil but also for criminal damages. If my dog gets loose and injures someone, I am also liable. Why, then, if my computer damages others' machines on the internet, should I not be liable for damages?
What I think needs to happen is this: Any owner of an infected netblock needs to be assessed a charge if their computers damage or disrupt traffic on the Internet. The fines should be commensurate with the amount of damage caused. If I'm a major ISP and I own a large netblock that's affected (even if I sell parts of that netblock off), it should be my responsibility to track down the sources of that disturbance within my network and eradicate it, otherwise I should be punished.
I no longer have any tolerance whatsoever for lazy or complacent admins; fines may finally force people to wake the fuck up and secure their goddamned machines and their networks. I mean, come on! Nimda exploits holes in Windows NT and 2000 that are over six months old, and it's done a pretty damned good job of showing me that there are plenty of clueless admins out there! These admins need to be dealt with, they're making life hard for the rest of us.
You call it nannying. I call it being responsible.
So glad that us geeks here on Slashdot don't have that problem. We have the best technical solutions to every problem anyway.
Like Perl and MySQL?
- A.P.
Most americans like Britney Spears and NSync too. This just serves as further proof that most americans don't know what's good for them.
- A.P.
...good thing you're not the surgeon then.
- A.P.
There's nothing at all wrong with a third nipple, damn it. I'm actually eating these things by the bucketful.
- A.P.
Them's good eatin'.
Till you grow a third nipple.
- A.P.
b) actually engage the Arab world in something other than warfare. As long as Afghanistan is in a state of near anarchy, and the threat of perpetual starvation hangs over it, terrorist groups are going to have a ready pool of applicants. If you want to overthrow the Taliban, fine. But don't leave another void so another Taliban will come to power. Build up infrastructure, create some sort of economy.
I happen to think this is the best way to go about it too, but I worry that the risks of it, if done improperly, would be worse than what's going on now there... Imagine a nation of *wealthier* pissed-off people?
- A.P.
I wish. Then I'd get to run Carnivore more often.
Folks, this war is going to take a long time. This isn't gonna be over in days or weeks or months, and the resolution is not gonna be on tomorrow's news. Once we find out who these people are and who their superiors are and how everything works (CNN reports that one of the guys we picked up in St. Louis tonight on a train is telling the FBI a lot about that shit), we have to go in and take out the Taliban "government" but do it in a way that doesn't kill many Afghani people, since they're not the ones who did this either. The Taliban is a fundamentalist regime, and those are bad and need to be dealt with. (Look at Iraq for an example of what happens when we don't and/or can't.) Going in and carpet-bombing the country isn't gonna be the way to do it though. I think that's why you haven't heard much about how or when or why we're going to attack parts of Afghanistan (and I firmly believe we will.)
Those who think we can't afford to kill innocent civilians there too, though, please take your rose-tinted glasses off. This isn't grade schoool and everything has a price in the real world. Freedom from the creeping tyranny of terrorism, though -- teaching those people that this is NOT the way to make friends and influence people -- requires some struggle and loss.
I am confident that, in the end, the good will far outweigh the bad in this thing. But it's going to take time.
- A.P.