Led Zeppelin was FAR more than fairly compensated for their work MANY YEARS ago. Artists have no right to live rich forever on work they did years ago. So I'm not worried about them. If they have squandered their fortunes let them get jobs again and work like the rest of us. Or just produce some new music. Even if copyright were only good for 5 years Led Zeppelin would have made out quite well. As would most artists whose work turned out to be worth something. If you can't make a living off of something after marketing it for 5 years perhaps it just wasn't that good. And even after 5 years you can continue to make money off of the work via live performances. I know I would definitely prefer to hear the original Led Zeppelin perform their non-copyrighted hits rather than a knock-off.
I'm not sure I buy this. Yes you can point the laser on the clouds at night on a cloudy night. You can't really see the beam unless there is mist in the air though. The last time I did this I bet the clouds were just 500 feet up around here. I bet you can even accurately hand target a helicopter flying at 500 feet up. I know I can easily hit the side of a tall palm tree which must be a good 500 feet away across the neighborhood. But blinding the pilot and causing eye problems for two hours? I just don't see that happening. Not unless they have one heck of a laser. And maybe they do. Anyone heard what the power of the laser used it? If it is the same as the one I have I am tempted to rig up some sort of remote control device where I can control the activation of the green laser form my back yard and go up with a safety pilot who would wear eye protection and turn it on and fly through it just to see what happens. Unfortunately nobody is likely to do such a test and these guys who did this are going to get a harsher penalty than they deserve. If they did it on purpose they surely deserve something though.
Using lasers could be a good way for people involved in an armed standoff with police to keep the police behind cover and unable to shoot or observe what is happening.
And I really like it. This laptop is great. I have a desktop with dual 24" displays for doing work so I don't need a laptop for that. What I do need is something ultra-portable to do email, read slashdot, occasional ssh into a remote machine while on the road, terminal into a box while at the datacenter, etc. And this thing fits the bill. The solid state disk has caused no problems so far but allows things like 10 second boot times and no noise and little heat. The prices of SSD will come down, the densities will go up, and SSD drives will proliferate.
It really depends on what kind of patch we are talking about but if it is a zero day security vulnerability I would expect it to be fixed in hours. The FOSS world is pretty much the gold standard for this sort of thing. If your software is super critical banking type stuff you should still be able to get a fix out in hours but also have an extensive set of regression tests to run the fix through so you can have some assurance that you did not break anything else.
I am very happy to hear this news and pointed a number of people at this machine. But it would be a lot more meaningful if we knew how many they sold out of. 10? Big whoop. 10,000? More impressive.
I have been using it and developing apps for it for the past three years. There is a learning curve but it is worth it. There are some great videos about how easy Plone is to work with on the plone site:
How do you prove who you voted for?
on
eBay The Vote
·
· Score: 1
I just RTFA'd and I still don't get it. Even if I wanted to sell my vote how would I prove that I voted the way they wanted me to? We don't get a receipt showing exactly how we voted for exactly this reason plus if we did we could be extorted to vote a certain way since proof is then available.
The turtle was the worst thing to ever happen to Logo. Logo is a full featured language capable of doing anything other languages can. But because we were all introduced to the turtle at relatively young ages and nobody ever showed us how to do anything more than draw simple pictures we all concluded that it was only a toy and not for serious use. Only now, years later, do I realize how wrong that was.
For those who want to rediscover Logo and learn what it was *really* all about you can go to the website of Brian Harvey, a logo guru:
On this website you can download a nice series of textbooks about Logo and also download the Berkeley Logo implementation of the language. I was surprised to find that Logo is a functional programming language. I am also studying Lisp, Scheme, Haskell, and Erlang and find the whole concept of functional programming to be very interesting. It is getting hot again and will become a critical part of programming if we are to take advantage of multi-core cpu's.
I am constantly amazed by just how vast this industry really is. I wish it hadn't taken me so long to realize this and I am saddened that so many people coming out of school these days have no clue that there is anything other than Java and Dot Not out there.
A friend emailed me about this just this morning. Here is what he wrote and my reply:
> I'm going to chalk this up (tentatively) to the increasing popularity of > Linux, which means that a subset of users will be those who don't actually > know what they're doing, and how to protect a box-- something long the norm > in the Windows world: > > http://computerworld.co.nz/news.nsf/scrt/CD0B9D97EE6FE411CC25736A000E4723 > > While there, he noticed an unusual trend when taking down phishing sites. >> "The vast majority of the threats we saw were rootkitted Linux boxes, >> which was rather startling. We expected Microsoft boxes," he said.
I am not surprised in the least that this was their conclusion. I don't chalk it up to the increasing popularity of Linux at all. I have never (not once) run across a Linux box operating in a botnet. Nor can anyone name a botnet software that infects Linux boxes. In the last 5 years I have found only one Linux box that had a security issue and that was because of PHP (*spit*) which had an XML-RPC exploit a while back and allowed someone to make the box host a fishing website that looked like some bank website. It seems very rare that a Linux desktop (not a webserver) would fall victim to this. I have never seen a security incident such as a botnet on a Linux desktop. I have seen that phishing page on the Linux server that hosted the bogus PHP install. That's it.
And I suspect that they are using terminology incorrectly. A Linux box hosting a fishing site is not part of a botnet. I can understand how Linux boxes would be more popular for fishing websites. PHP is popular and is a pox on Linux as PHP released a bunch of absolute garbage which only happens to run on Linux. It can run on Windows also but that is the expensive and less reliable way to do it so few people do. If people make a conscious decision to install software on Linux that lets just about anyone use the box for whatever they want such as PHP often does I don't think counts against Linux security.
Glancing over the article I immediately spotted this:
"eBay recently did an in-depth analysis of its threat situation, and while the company is not releasing the results of this analysis, it did uncover a huge number of hacked, botnet computers, said Dave Cullinane, eBay's chief information and security officer, speaking at a Microsoft-sponsored security symposium at Santa Clara University."
I challenge anyone to find a single MS sponsored paper or symposium which DOESN'T come to a conclusion favorable to MS and unfavorable to Linux. Just one. And they won't release the raw data. How much is a large botnet? 10? 100? Among millions of infected MS machines. I would also like to know what this alleged Linux botnet software is called.
I am positive that Linux will not be nearly so adversely affected by users who do not know what they are doing. Linux is very different from Windows and is architected for performance, security, and utility instead of being architected to make someone a boatload of money and maintaining monopoly lock-in. (See the fine the EU just imposed on MS.)
Some technical features which help ensure that even if Linux becomes popular on the desktop it won't suffer the same fate as Windows:
* Linux users don't run as admin/root.
* Email programs do not automatically execute attachments.
* Does not depend on filename extensions for anything.
* System of mandatory access controls (SE Linux) which really locks things down (some people still turn that off but it is improving rapidly, I use it on my desktop).
* Linux also takes advantage of NX (non-executable memory) which is a recent feature of x86 cpu's
Yeah, some stuff works a bit differently and things aren't in the places I'm used to seeing them, but on the whole it's not *that* bad.
I don't understand why people can tolerate this and not complain so much about "retraining issues" when yet another version of Windows with gratuitous changes comes along but when you talk about putting Linux on office workers desktops people say it will never work because of the expense of retraining everyone. I have put Fedora and Ubuntu in front of a number of former Windows users and they figured it out quite readily. And we are talking low level minimum wage earning employees here. Not rocket scientists.
"SCO owns the core UNIX operating system, originally developed by AT&T/Bell Labs and is the exclusive licensor to UNIX-based system software providers."
Every airport (commercial or not although I'm not sure what "commercial" means in this context) will let him take off without one. I have taken off from many airports in the US and not filed a flight plan.
I hate this whole "didn't file a flight plan" business that non-pilots and news media always get so stuck on. I have a thousand hours of flying time. I have only ever filed a VFR flight plan one time during training (I file IFR flight plans whenever I will be in the clouds of course) to make sure I knew how to do it. All other times I get "VFR flight following" which is where I have a squawk code, am being tracked on radar, and am in contact with a controller on the radio. It is better than flight following. If I have a problem I can just press the transmit button and start telling someone about it. And if I go down I will be very near my last point of radar contact. These days nearly all of the US has radar coverage. I can't recall when I have ever been without radar for more than a few minutes. Having a flight plan is not the big deal it is made out to be and not filing one is not a huge fuckup. The worst thing about filing a VFR flight plan? The fear that you might forget to close it and have a rescue effort launched while you are in the bar enjoying a post flight evening.
I have lost all electrical power at 10,000 feet on the way to Las Vegas from San Diego. Not fun. No lights, no instruments, no maps, no radio, nothing. You know those Think Geek red LED keychain lights? For the last 5 years I have carried one on my keychain and in my flight bag. It's a real lifesaver!:)
Perhaps I am misunderstanding when the original poster says:
You can separate the two particles (even by a huge distance), collapse one particle into a state and the other particle collapses instantaneously into the corresponding state.
So when he collapses his, mine collapses also. Perhaps what you are saying is that this is one of those Heisenberg situations where I cannot in any way measure the spin of mine to compare with (so that I know when it collapsed) without causing my partners particle to collapse also? I guess there is no way to tell when the actual collapse occurs without causing the other entangled particle to collapse.
2. Quantum instantaneousness. Two particles can be put into a quantum entanglement, such that their states depend on one another, even though they have not 'picked' a particular state yet. You can separate the two particles (even by a huge distance), collapse one particle into a state and the other particle collapses instantaneously into the corresponding state.
Your explanation is as I have read many times and seems to be good physics to my untrained thinking. One thing which I have never understood about this is that if you have a particle and I have the corresponding tangled particle and we are separated by a great distance and you collapse yours mine will collapse also. I don't know what state yours collapsed to and cannot tell anything from what state mine collapsed to. But I *do* know that you collapsed yours. Isn't that information? What if you and I each have a vast number of entangled particles ordered in a line. You start collapsing your particles with a certain timing. Say, for example, morse code. Particle collapses 1 second apart are dits and 2 seconds apart are dahs. Now don't we have a means of transmitting information faster than light? Surely this is not possible, right? But I don't understand why not.
Wireless? Cable TV networks? DSL? I don't see how the state can mandate anything with regard to other peoples physical infrastructure like cable TV and phone networks. So what technology do they intend to use to bring broadband to everyone? Surely the state isn't planning to dig up all of the streets in the state and put down fiber are they?
I am really surprised they did not use the Lustre filesystem for their data storage since it is vendor neutral, open, and designed for exactly this sort of thing. The lustre guys report being able to obtain tremendous bandwidth and scalability. I have not yet been able to play with Lustre but I look forward to doing so.
I considered setting up a site to do this a long time ago but then I figured nobody would ever trust me to generate their random numbers so why bother?
Slashdot Mirror
Led Zeppelin was FAR more than fairly compensated for their work MANY YEARS ago. Artists have no right to live rich forever on work they did years ago. So I'm not worried about them. If they have squandered their fortunes let them get jobs again and work like the rest of us. Or just produce some new music. Even if copyright were only good for 5 years Led Zeppelin would have made out quite well. As would most artists whose work turned out to be worth something. If you can't make a living off of something after marketing it for 5 years perhaps it just wasn't that good. And even after 5 years you can continue to make money off of the work via live performances. I know I would definitely prefer to hear the original Led Zeppelin perform their non-copyrighted hits rather than a knock-off.
I'm not sure I buy this. Yes you can point the laser on the clouds at night on a cloudy night. You can't really see the beam unless there is mist in the air though. The last time I did this I bet the clouds were just 500 feet up around here. I bet you can even accurately hand target a helicopter flying at 500 feet up. I know I can easily hit the side of a tall palm tree which must be a good 500 feet away across the neighborhood. But blinding the pilot and causing eye problems for two hours? I just don't see that happening. Not unless they have one heck of a laser. And maybe they do. Anyone heard what the power of the laser used it? If it is the same as the one I have I am tempted to rig up some sort of remote control device where I can control the activation of the green laser form my back yard and go up with a safety pilot who would wear eye protection and turn it on and fly through it just to see what happens. Unfortunately nobody is likely to do such a test and these guys who did this are going to get a harsher penalty than they deserve. If they did it on purpose they surely deserve something though.
Using lasers could be a good way for people involved in an armed standoff with police to keep the police behind cover and unable to shoot or observe what is happening.
AoE is awesome, it is cheap, it is simple. 8 page RFC. The only SAN protocol you can really understand completely in one sitting.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATA_over_Ethernet
And combine it with Xen or other virtualization technology and you have a really slick setup:
http://xenaoe.org/
...the latest issue of the "Highly Reliable Times".
...just because they don't like the competition. There has GOT to be a way to turn this despicable behavior into a PR disaster for Wintel.
And I really like it. This laptop is great. I have a desktop with dual 24" displays for doing work so I don't need a laptop for that. What I do need is something ultra-portable to do email, read slashdot, occasional ssh into a remote machine while on the road, terminal into a box while at the datacenter, etc. And this thing fits the bill. The solid state disk has caused no problems so far but allows things like 10 second boot times and no noise and little heat. The prices of SSD will come down, the densities will go up, and SSD drives will proliferate.
It really depends on what kind of patch we are talking about but if it is a zero day security vulnerability I would expect it to be fixed in hours. The FOSS world is pretty much the gold standard for this sort of thing. If your software is super critical banking type stuff you should still be able to get a fix out in hours but also have an extensive set of regression tests to run the fix through so you can have some assurance that you did not break anything else.
I am very happy to hear this news and pointed a number of people at this machine. But it would be a lot more meaningful if we knew how many they sold out of. 10? Big whoop. 10,000? More impressive.
Live migration rocks. I have used it many times in Xen 3.1 between AMD x86-64 machines.
I have been using it and developing apps for it for the past three years. There is a learning curve but it is worth it. There are some great videos about how easy Plone is to work with on the plone site:
http://plone.org/about/movies
I just RTFA'd and I still don't get it. Even if I wanted to sell my vote how would I prove that I voted the way they wanted me to? We don't get a receipt showing exactly how we voted for exactly this reason plus if we did we could be extorted to vote a certain way since proof is then available.
The turtle was the worst thing to ever happen to Logo. Logo is a full featured language capable of doing anything other languages can. But because we were all introduced to the turtle at relatively young ages and nobody ever showed us how to do anything more than draw simple pictures we all concluded that it was only a toy and not for serious use. Only now, years later, do I realize how wrong that was.
For those who want to rediscover Logo and learn what it was *really* all about you can go to the website of Brian Harvey, a logo guru:
http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~bh/
On this website you can download a nice series of textbooks about Logo and also download the Berkeley Logo implementation of the language. I was surprised to find that Logo is a functional programming language. I am also studying Lisp, Scheme, Haskell, and Erlang and find the whole concept of functional programming to be very interesting. It is getting hot again and will become a critical part of programming if we are to take advantage of multi-core cpu's.
I am constantly amazed by just how vast this industry really is. I wish it hadn't taken me so long to realize this and I am saddened that so many people coming out of school these days have no clue that there is anything other than Java and Dot Not out there.
A friend emailed me about this just this morning. Here is what he wrote and my reply:
> I'm going to chalk this up (tentatively) to the increasing popularity of
> Linux, which means that a subset of users will be those who don't actually
> know what they're doing, and how to protect a box-- something long the norm
> in the Windows world:
>
> http://computerworld.co.nz/news.nsf/scrt/CD0B9D97EE6FE411CC25736A000E4723
>
> While there, he noticed an unusual trend when taking down phishing sites.
>> "The vast majority of the threats we saw were rootkitted Linux boxes,
>> which was rather startling. We expected Microsoft boxes," he said.
I am not surprised in the least that this was their conclusion. I don't chalk it up to the increasing popularity of Linux at all. I have never (not once) run across a Linux box operating in a botnet. Nor can anyone name a botnet software that infects Linux boxes. In the last 5 years I have found only one Linux box that had a security issue and that was because of PHP (*spit*) which had an XML-RPC exploit a while back and allowed someone to make the box host a fishing website that looked like some bank website. It seems very rare that a Linux desktop (not a webserver) would fall victim to this. I have never seen a security incident such as a botnet on a Linux desktop. I have seen that phishing page on the Linux server that hosted the bogus PHP install. That's it.
And I suspect that they are using terminology incorrectly. A Linux box hosting a fishing site is not part of a botnet. I can understand how Linux boxes would be more popular for fishing websites. PHP is popular and is a pox on Linux as PHP released a bunch of absolute garbage which only happens to run on Linux. It can run on Windows also but that is the expensive and less reliable way to do it so few people do. If people make a conscious decision to install software on Linux that lets just about anyone use the box for whatever they want such as PHP often does I don't think counts against Linux security.
Glancing over the article I immediately spotted this:
"eBay recently did an in-depth analysis of its threat situation, and while the company is not releasing the results of this analysis, it did uncover a huge number of hacked, botnet computers, said Dave Cullinane, eBay's chief information and security officer, speaking at a Microsoft-sponsored security symposium at Santa Clara University."
I challenge anyone to find a single MS sponsored paper or symposium which DOESN'T come to a conclusion favorable to MS and unfavorable to Linux. Just one. And they won't release the raw data. How much is a large botnet? 10? 100? Among millions of infected MS machines. I would also like to know what this alleged Linux botnet software is called.
I am positive that Linux will not be nearly so adversely affected by users who do not know what they are doing. Linux is very different from Windows and is architected for performance, security, and utility instead of being architected to make someone a boatload of money and maintaining monopoly lock-in. (See the fine the EU just imposed on MS.)
Some technical features which help ensure that even if Linux becomes popular on the desktop it won't suffer the same fate as Windows:
* Linux users don't run as admin/root.
* Email programs do not automatically execute attachments.
* Does not depend on filename extensions for anything.
* Does not auto-run anything from inserted media (Worth a laugh: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,299155,00.html )
* System of mandatory access controls (SE Linux) which really locks things down (some people still turn that off but it is improving rapidly, I use it on my desktop).
* Linux also takes advantage of NX (non-executable memory) which is a recent feature of x86 cpu's
I don't understand why people can tolerate this and not complain so much about "retraining issues" when yet another version of Windows with gratuitous changes comes along but when you talk about putting Linux on office workers desktops people say it will never work because of the expense of retraining everyone. I have put Fedora and Ubuntu in front of a number of former Windows users and they figured it out quite readily. And we are talking low level minimum wage earning employees here. Not rocket scientists.
The press release http://ir.sco.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=264124 says:
"SCO owns the core UNIX operating system, originally developed by AT&T/Bell Labs and is the exclusive licensor to UNIX-based system software providers."
Those SCO guys are a real pantload! Hahahahah
Every airport (commercial or not although I'm not sure what "commercial" means in this context) will let him take off without one. I have taken off from many airports in the US and not filed a flight plan.
I hate this whole "didn't file a flight plan" business that non-pilots and news media always get so stuck on. I have a thousand hours of flying time. I have only ever filed a VFR flight plan one time during training (I file IFR flight plans whenever I will be in the clouds of course) to make sure I knew how to do it. All other times I get "VFR flight following" which is where I have a squawk code, am being tracked on radar, and am in contact with a controller on the radio. It is better than flight following. If I have a problem I can just press the transmit button and start telling someone about it. And if I go down I will be very near my last point of radar contact. These days nearly all of the US has radar coverage. I can't recall when I have ever been without radar for more than a few minutes. Having a flight plan is not the big deal it is made out to be and not filing one is not a huge fuckup. The worst thing about filing a VFR flight plan? The fear that you might forget to close it and have a rescue effort launched while you are in the bar enjoying a post flight evening.
That's the box where you keep your "motion lotion". What do I win?
I have lost all electrical power at 10,000 feet on the way to Las Vegas from San Diego. Not fun. No lights, no instruments, no maps, no radio, nothing. You know those Think Geek red LED keychain lights? For the last 5 years I have carried one on my keychain and in my flight bag. It's a real lifesaver! :)
I don't see what his problem is. Installing Gentoo is easy. All you have to do is:
1) fdisk
So when he collapses his, mine collapses also. Perhaps what you are saying is that this is one of those Heisenberg situations where I cannot in any way measure the spin of mine to compare with (so that I know when it collapsed) without causing my partners particle to collapse also? I guess there is no way to tell when the actual collapse occurs without causing the other entangled particle to collapse.
Your explanation is as I have read many times and seems to be good physics to my untrained thinking. One thing which I have never understood about this is that if you have a particle and I have the corresponding tangled particle and we are separated by a great distance and you collapse yours mine will collapse also. I don't know what state yours collapsed to and cannot tell anything from what state mine collapsed to. But I *do* know that you collapsed yours. Isn't that information? What if you and I each have a vast number of entangled particles ordered in a line. You start collapsing your particles with a certain timing. Say, for example, morse code. Particle collapses 1 second apart are dits and 2 seconds apart are dahs. Now don't we have a means of transmitting information faster than light? Surely this is not possible, right? But I don't understand why not.
Wireless? Cable TV networks? DSL? I don't see how the state can mandate anything with regard to other peoples physical infrastructure like cable TV and phone networks. So what technology do they intend to use to bring broadband to everyone? Surely the state isn't planning to dig up all of the streets in the state and put down fiber are they?
I am really surprised they did not use the Lustre filesystem for their data storage since it is vendor neutral, open, and designed for exactly this sort of thing. The lustre guys report being able to obtain tremendous bandwidth and scalability. I have not yet been able to play with Lustre but I look forward to doing so.
I considered setting up a site to do this a long time ago but then I figured nobody would ever trust me to generate their random numbers so why bother?