"From this observation it appears highly likely that the demand for IPv4 addresses will continue at rates comparable to current rates across the IPv4 unallocated address pool and after it is exhausted. The exhaustion of the current framework of supply of IPv4 addresses will not trigger an abrupt cessation of demand for IPv4 addresses, and this event will not cause the deployment of IPv6-only networks, at least in the short term of the initial years following IPv4 address pool exhaustion. It is therefore possible to indicate that immediately following this exhaustion event there will be a continuing market need for IPv4 addresses for deployment in new networks"
> You are claiming that there is no way there could be different products that used the same document format
Oh no please!!! See my other example... a lot of IP stacks "read" IPV4... I'm talking from the M$ point of view: They found convenient to develop a product that satisfies everybody, no matter the bloat.
BTW, I don't share your hope in ODF, despite using almost exclusively (the bloated) Open Office for years, but that's just an opinion.
But I found most difficult to believe that most users (non geeks) will like being offered a lot of Office Suites. Despite your (or my) wishes, most users just want "the office suite" that is "just component of the computer". And you have to accept that that kind of user is the main driver for Office Suite development (nobody ever will develop Office for Geeks.)
MS Office was (for many years key) to converting MS in the multibillion dollar corporation we know today. Nobody can say that the current low share price is because "Office is bloated".
>> Why should one single product satisfy the needs of everybody?
Because everybody wants to share documents without "converters".
>> In normal markets you have many different products targeting different niches in the market
Yes, this doesn't contradict the above.
Think of the Internet, IPV4 was successful (and of course now obsolete) because satisfied the needs of everybody. Nobody wants niches like IPX, for example.
You may rant all day against Microsoft Office from an engineering point of view, but from a marketing and commercial perspective (which is about this story deals) it is a millionaire success.
BTW, the "99%-never-used" argument was long ago demonstrated as flawed, from a commercial POV again: nobody will need the 100% or the options at once, but it is needed to cover the 100% of your users.
> Professional drivers frequently chat on the radio, yet remain safer than ordinary drivers. Some people just have their priorities straight.
Yes, for example highway patrols; the same applies for air pilots. But most of the time, that radio chat is about something very related with the driving activity (or in a plane, for example, ground control guiding the landing in a cloudy sky) so it actually improves attention.
Cell phone calls mostly are a totally different thing... you get a call from a client wanting support or wanting to close a deal... you automatically start doing numbers.... and crash!
Thanks.. this sounds a bit like the Kde and Gnome "options" that mislead a lot of Linux developers, but in the right way to be solved. BTW, D is not in standard Ubuntu repositories, but I've found this:
"The standard library in D is called Phobos. Some members of the D community think Phobos is too simplistic and that it has numerous quirks and other issues, and a replacement of the library called Tango was written.[4] However, in the D 1.0 branch, Tango and Phobos are incompatible due to different runtime libraries (the garbage collector, threading support, etc). The existence of two libraries, both widely in use, has led to significant problems where some packages use Phobos and others use Tango."
May you elaborate about that? open source implementation? Please note I'm not ranting against D, just desiring to learn.
While I agree that the complexity of the full C++ language and libraries is a valid issue, I don't understand why you preach going the C-way:
> It's harder to realize why you don't just make fields public until you've seen global variables in a C program.
Please... this way everyone should be first learning GW-BASIC or COMMODORE BASIC to understand and "feel" a lot of bad practices. That approach may be valid if people would have a lot of years to learn programing languages.
Think other way... would you train a pilot to flight by first crashing its plane to "feel" the destruction? or a doctor by using medieval techniques to grasp why he should use anesthesia?
One conventional answer to the question ''Which subset of C++ should I learn first?'' is ''The C subset of C++.'' In my considered opinion, that's not a good answer. The C-first approach leads to an early focus on low-level details. It also obscures programming style and design issues by forces the student to face many technical difficulties to express anything interesting.
And don't forget that those IETF PhD's couldn't design a better way to upgrade IPV4 but the incompatible and essentially non-interoperable IPV6 (please don't argue about dual stacks or something similar.)
I don't care about Joe at all, but I understand that if Joe can use Linux, then:
1) More companies will be willing to port some very important (to me) niche-specific applications to Linux, like, Autocad (please don't start yelling here the propietary-is-evil thing again...)
2) Computer makers will be willing to provide Linux pre-installed machines... Some years ago I enjoyed recompiling the kernel to support an Ethernet card, but today I have a lot more important things to do.
Agreed too. Now trying to make something of this, I think it could be interesting to see some short TV miniseries based on it... Maybe a dozen of chapters with a really big script edition and avoiding bloated FX.
I agree w/you that taxpayers need and like black and white numbers, but this is pure investigation, and it is not always possible to have a fixed date for though problem solving... repairing this machine is not like change a car fuel pump; maybe (BTW I'm guessing) the reparations do involve some additional math/physic corrections, and so the yet undetermined lapses.
Of course this can not be like a deadline for solving the P/NP problem, but for sure the time estimations have a high margin of variability.
>>This is a forum for technical people who, due to their geek nature, prefer to use the appropriate notation to communicate things not easily communicated in ASCII.
Nonsense!!! real geeks love to use ASCII art in order to represent weird symbols! (except of course, those newbies used to Java's unicode... but of course they do not count as real geeks.)
Re:They are using RPM 4.6.0 release candidate
on
Fedora 10 Released
·
· Score: 1
Well, I agree it is nice for a lot of things... but not sure about the time it takes to setup, manage, and specially debug when some things apparently unrelated, simply don't work.
But I have to admit I didn't tried enough to learn it in the right way. Every time I dealt with seLinux was for troubleshooting some application that after a lot of wasted time, got solved mysteriously just by disabling seLinux. Maybe your comment will encourage me to give it another try.
Re:They are using RPM 4.6.0 release candidate
on
Fedora 10 Released
·
· Score: 1
Does somebody (beyond government bureaucrats) really uses seLinux on??? Does somebody understand the enhanced permissions??? Does somebody needs those fine-grained object access controls???
The point with experimental code is not to be provided to less people, but to the really qualified or with the real necessity ones. And the other way, many unsavvy users with lots of time or patience will go through the registration process.
Maybe a compromise can be archived... do not provide a clickable link to the experimentals-page, but other ways to access: a repository ala subversion?
For people working a lot with internet tech, registration is really a PITA... having to carry lists of more usernames/passwords, creating fake email accounts to avoid marketing spam (not implying that Mozilla does it), losing time, retyping the form because you missed some address detail, inventing more passwords (you will not give your web-banking passwords to every web site), etc... When will understand the web-marketing guys?
"Whether the general mammoth population died out for climatic reasons or due to overhunting by humans is controversial. Another theory suggests that mammoths may have fallen victim to an infectious disease. A combination of climate change and hunting by humans is the most likely explanation for their extinction."
Maybe resurrecting the animal can provide better clues?
And as soon as the first Ubuntu store is opened, we'll have the vocal crowd of Debian zealots trashing it as a copy-cat... followed by the Gentoo "compiler-users" confusing everyone about sub-optimization, the RedHat corporate clients talking about the lack of a well established corporation and certifications...
Seriously, beside the graphical issues, there is no consensus in a single marketing brand. A distro name is rejected by other distros, and Linux can't be used as a brand, because in reality it is GNU/Linux, didn't it?
Slashdot Mirror
You're right in the first part. But...
>> Nowadays people are fast at work in patches that make IPv6 compatible in the sense of (ii).
That a lot of systems are capable of IPV6 doesn't means the Internet has been migrated, or will be in short term.
For example, there is a nice (and a bit depressing) article available at http://www.cisco.com/web/about/ac123/ac147/archived_issues/ipj_11-3/113_ipv4.html ... extract follows:
"From this observation it appears highly likely that the demand for IPv4 addresses will continue at rates comparable to current rates across the IPv4 unallocated address pool and after it is exhausted. The exhaustion of the current framework of supply of IPv4 addresses will not trigger an abrupt cessation of demand for IPv4 addresses, and this event will not cause the deployment of IPv6-only networks, at least in the short term of the initial years following IPv4 address pool exhaustion. It is therefore possible to indicate that immediately following this exhaustion event there will be a continuing market need for IPv4 addresses for deployment in new networks"
Yeah, exactly like IPV6.
wait....
Hey, you're reading wrong!
> You are claiming that there is no way there could be different products that used the same document format
Oh no please!!! See my other example... a lot of IP stacks "read" IPV4... I'm talking from the M$ point of view: They found convenient to develop a product that satisfies everybody, no matter the bloat.
BTW, I don't share your hope in ODF, despite using almost exclusively (the bloated) Open Office for years, but that's just an opinion.
But I found most difficult to believe that most users (non geeks) will like being offered a lot of Office Suites. Despite your (or my) wishes, most users just want "the office suite" that is "just component of the computer". And you have to accept that that kind of user is the main driver for Office Suite development (nobody ever will develop Office for Geeks.)
regards
>> Otherwise their share price would not be crap.
MS Office was (for many years key) to converting MS in the multibillion dollar corporation we know today. Nobody can say that the current low share price is because "Office is bloated".
>> Why should one single product satisfy the needs of everybody?
Because everybody wants to share documents without "converters".
>> In normal markets you have many different products targeting different niches in the market
Yes, this doesn't contradict the above.
Think of the Internet, IPV4 was successful (and of course now obsolete) because satisfied the needs of everybody. Nobody wants niches like IPX, for example.
You're right... silly me for not searching correctly.
You may rant all day against Microsoft Office from an engineering point of view, but from a marketing and commercial perspective (which is about this story deals) it is a millionaire success.
BTW, the "99%-never-used" argument was long ago demonstrated as flawed, from a commercial POV again: nobody will need the 100% or the options at once, but it is needed to cover the 100% of your users.
regards,
> Professional drivers frequently chat on the radio, yet remain safer than ordinary drivers. Some people just have their priorities straight.
Yes, for example highway patrols; the same applies for air pilots. But most of the time, that radio chat is about something very related with the driving activity (or in a plane, for example, ground control guiding the landing in a cloudy sky) so it actually improves attention.
Cell phone calls mostly are a totally different thing... you get a call from a client wanting support or wanting to close a deal... you automatically start doing numbers.... and crash!
Thanks.. this sounds a bit like the Kde and Gnome "options" that mislead a lot of Linux developers, but in the right way to be solved. BTW, D is not in standard Ubuntu repositories, but I've found this:
http://www.plasticboy.de/2007/11/03/installing-gdc-for-the-d-programming-language-the-ubuntu-way/
Maybe I'll try it one of these days.
I don't know nor ever used D, but from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D_programming_language it doesn't look as the "final product":
"The standard library in D is called Phobos. Some members of the D community think Phobos is too simplistic and that it has numerous quirks and other issues, and a replacement of the library called Tango was written.[4] However, in the D 1.0 branch, Tango and Phobos are incompatible due to different runtime libraries (the garbage collector, threading support, etc). The existence of two libraries, both widely in use, has led to significant problems where some packages use Phobos and others use Tango."
May you elaborate about that? open source implementation? Please note I'm not ranting against D, just desiring to learn.
While I agree that the complexity of the full C++ language and libraries is a valid issue, I don't understand why you preach going the C-way:
> It's harder to realize why you don't just make fields public until you've seen global variables in a C program.
Please... this way everyone should be first learning GW-BASIC or COMMODORE BASIC to understand and "feel" a lot of bad practices. That approach may be valid if people would have a lot of years to learn programing languages.
Think other way... would you train a pilot to flight by first crashing its plane to "feel" the destruction? or a doctor by using medieval techniques to grasp why he should use anesthesia?
You're right. Also Stroustrup had clearly pointed (in other argument lines) that C is not the better way to learn C++ (or OO in general):
BEGIN EXCERPT from http://www.research.att.com/~bs/new_learning.pdf :
One conventional answer to the question ''Which subset of C++ should I learn first?'' is ''The C subset
of C++.'' In my considered opinion, that's not a good answer. The C-first approach leads to an early focus
on low-level details. It also obscures programming style and design issues by forces the student to face
many technical difficulties to express anything interesting.
And don't forget that those IETF PhD's couldn't design a better way to upgrade IPV4 but the incompatible and essentially non-interoperable IPV6 (please don't argue about dual stacks or something similar.)
I don't care about Joe at all, but I understand that if Joe can use Linux, then:
1) More companies will be willing to port some very important (to me) niche-specific applications to Linux, like, Autocad (please don't start yelling here the propietary-is-evil thing again...)
2) Computer makers will be willing to provide Linux pre-installed machines... Some years ago I enjoyed recompiling the kernel to support an Ethernet card, but today I have a lot more important things to do.
regards,
Agreed too. Now trying to make something of this, I think it could be interesting to see some short TV miniseries based on it... Maybe a dozen of chapters with a really big script edition and avoiding bloated FX.
I agree w/you that taxpayers need and like black and white numbers, but this is pure investigation, and it is not always possible to have a fixed date for though problem solving... repairing this machine is not like change a car fuel pump; maybe (BTW I'm guessing) the reparations do involve some additional math/physic corrections, and so the yet undetermined lapses.
Of course this can not be like a deadline for solving the P/NP problem, but for sure the time estimations have a high margin of variability.
>>This is a forum for technical people who, due to their geek nature, prefer to use the appropriate notation to communicate things not easily communicated in ASCII.
Nonsense!!! real geeks love to use ASCII art in order to represent weird symbols! (except of course, those newbies used to Java's unicode... but of course they do not count as real geeks.)
Well, I agree it is nice for a lot of things... but not sure about the time it takes to setup, manage, and specially debug when some things apparently unrelated, simply don't work.
But I have to admit I didn't tried enough to learn it in the right way. Every time I dealt with seLinux was for troubleshooting some application that after a lot of wasted time, got solved mysteriously just by disabling seLinux. Maybe your comment will encourage me to give it another try.
Does somebody (beyond government bureaucrats) really uses seLinux on??? Does somebody understand the enhanced permissions??? Does somebody needs those fine-grained object access controls???
No, no... in reality this happens when you talk/lecture about the boring M$ products.
Ok, now I'm awaiting to be modded insightful too...
> So how do I use the check boxes with the RSS feed, oh great and powerful alpha-nerd?
Obviously by writing a trivial customized firefox plugin, as every real slashdotter does in his waste time every Saturday night for fun...
Real slashdotters use lots of the nice checkboxes to change their preferences. Nerds are complex beasts.
Yeah of course, but yet it doesn't make sense...
The point with experimental code is not to be provided to less people, but to the really qualified or with the real necessity ones. And the other way, many unsavvy users with lots of time or patience will go through the registration process.
Maybe a compromise can be archived... do not provide a clickable link to the experimentals-page, but other ways to access: a repository ala subversion?
For people working a lot with internet tech, registration is really a PITA... having to carry lists of more usernames/passwords, creating fake email accounts to avoid marketing spam (not implying that Mozilla does it), losing time, retyping the form because you missed some address detail, inventing more passwords (you will not give your web-banking passwords to every web site), etc... When will understand the web-marketing guys?
> They make you register to download those, so you can't bitch at them when it gobbles up all your bookmarks or something.
Yet I don't understand the relationship. If I will publish unstable code, the important thing is to clearly state that it is unstable, right?
As far as we know, there is no consensus on the causes. From the handy http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mammoth :
"Whether the general mammoth population died out for climatic reasons or due to overhunting by humans is controversial. Another theory suggests that mammoths may have fallen victim to an infectious disease. A combination of climate change and hunting by humans is the most likely explanation for their extinction."
Maybe resurrecting the animal can provide better clues?
And as soon as the first Ubuntu store is opened, we'll have the vocal crowd of Debian zealots trashing it as a copy-cat... followed by the Gentoo "compiler-users" confusing everyone about sub-optimization, the RedHat corporate clients talking about the lack of a well established corporation and certifications...
Seriously, beside the graphical issues, there is no consensus in a single marketing brand. A distro name is rejected by other distros, and Linux can't be used as a brand, because in reality it is GNU/Linux, didn't it?