In the same way as your description of your perception of people in Microsoft apply to Microsoft - you wrote it confuses you that some people claim Microsoft is evil claiming there arre good (not evil) people there. In response I speculated based on your post, advancing it along this path:
people at MS are good
so they they have good intentions
based on those intentions they are doing things
their actions have some effects
one of those effects is them (MS people) being percieved as evil (by some other people)
Of course I'm not going to insist there is mathematical pecission nor exact logic in this. I even do not insist this is some kind of reasoning nor correct explanation of your dilema.
I'm just suggesting possibilities.
And WRT Vista being bad for the environment, aren't the people saying it just a little bit... crazy?
Maybe. But for example also people who make peace by starting war looks to me as having same deficiency.
I'm sorry, but WTF does Gates spending his personal fortune on charitable causes have to do with the company?
One of the founders. The public face of the company.
I.e. something like "fuzzy loging" or "intuitive decisions" or "estimate" or whatever: great feature of our mental powers but also source of fataly wrong decisions in some cases.
How do a group of people who are not evil get together and do something evil?
Maybe it has something to do with the saying:
Road to hell is paved with good intentions.
Or take a look a look at story covered in following post: UK Greens Declare Vista Bad For Environment - maybe the attempt to give customers "better experience" and also "satisfying *IAA" is supported by good intentions but here you are: at least greens consider it evil.
Peter F. Hamilton uses the term "squirt" in his books too. Meaning something along the lines of "sending copy of some data from one device to another via some short-range optical interface using red light".
And "exatly" are just some sounds or graphical symbols I copied from someone (I guess from my firts or second teacher of english, while english is not my mother-tongue).
If you do not want something to be copied, do not tell it, do not write it. Maybe in the future you should also forget it ASAP so that you wont broadcast it accidentaly with your brain using EM waves or something which others my pick-up.
Now, I'm awaiting my moderation of this meta-discussion.
Sorry if I waste anyones time or mod-points but frankly, some moderations are quite... questionable and I see that StikyPad's post #17654484 is still at score 2, Troll. Which is IMO unfair.
I sometimes think that a lot of problems nowdays exists because everyone ussualy interacts with strangers even if the matter is quite important.
Look for example at the problem of somebody robbing your appartment/house. If I'm not mistaken, it is more probable in big city than in small village. Maybe it's because in a big city, you know almost noone, not even your neighbours. In a small village, everybody knows everybody and it is much harder to rob someone elses house being mistaken by neigbour as "maybe some new guy moved in, or some family visiting,...".
So, if my line of thinking is correct, your advice may be the solution for a lot of todays problems: do not make business with strangers and you get less fraud, less cheating, less lies,... and generaly less problems.
I myself used film reference in discussion related to this article.
That reminds me of an article here on/. about NSA or something looking at movies for predictions about threats to national security. I'm unable to find the article so maybe I do not remember correctly.
But still, there are a lot of things to learn from movies and books. Even stories for little children contain some knowledge in addition to entertainment. But it looks like that people after certain age fail to realize that and that's why "grown-ups" call such things "entertainment".
And maybe that's also the reason why only minority of people fail to see anything bad on proposals like described in this article even after seeing Brazil, 1984, Enemy of the State,...
I wouldn't be surprised if the information collected is being sold to various agencies by the Americans...
I assume that by "Americans" you mean "US government agencies".
As we have opportunity to read for example this: DHS Gets Another "F" In Cyber Security, I have to point out that such information will be (if not alredy is) available also to non-government and non-US and also non-agencies.
Some people said/wrote, that privacy is alredy dead so the solution would be for everybody to be able to wach everybody else. Such solution would also include ability of ordinary people to watch police, of course. Not like now, where police can watch anybody but nobody can watch police - see Enemy of the State, quote at the end: "and who is going to watch the watchers of watchers...?".
First, I have to repeat what othes alredy stated (for themselves): I do not hate Microsoft, nor Bill Gates. I just avoid them and sometimes wish they cease to exist ASAP (I do not want to kill them, but rather want them to move on, enyoy the money they made so far and stop interfering with my life).
Why:
Stability of their OS: I was using 8-bit Atari computers (games, BASIC, assembler,...). Stability was good.
I've been using MS DOS on i286 and i386 (Pascal, assembler, games,...) and stability was OK too (because bad stability was mainly issue of apps I was using rather than OS).
Then I used Windows 3.1 (Pascal,...) and stability was bad and in no minor part thanks to OS. We ware told that that's because of limitations of 16-bit CPUs and that 32-bit i386 CPU with new 32-bit Windows 95 will solve that.
Well, Windows 95 come (I've used it for programming and games etc.), but stability did not improve much.
And then come year 1997 when I heard that this so called Linux is more stable than Windows. I gave it a try and it was true. That helped me realize that yes, with i386 and later 32-bit CPUs it is possible to implement a stable OS but Microsoft is not able to do that.
From that time I used Linux more and more.
Ease of use and transparency of their products: As a programmer, I'm not typical PC user. But I do not consider myself to be somewhat special nor bright nor "knows everything". Maybe just "slightly better that average". But I'm still strugling to understand Microsoft's products, how to use them properly, how to set them up to suit my needs, how to set them up to be secure,... Those products often border on insanity, logic being the last think they conform to, it seems. The only think I do undestand so far (at least I hope) is the fact, that I'm unable to understand it - like with women: a man is, it looks like, unable to understand a woman.:)
They make my life harder: After I started using Linux I realized with each passing month more and more the extent of Microsoft's influence on IT (PC market, home usage and small businesses at least). And this realization indicated, that while they did help to push the PC into mainstream thus easing life of millions, after roughly Windows 95 (with some bright exceptions) they mainly make thinks worse for at least peple like me. Their approach to standards, their constant pressure for their products to be the main (or maybe even the only) product in the world, their innovation (better described as mostly aquisitions and strategic "dissapierance" of competitors) etc. It makes life for "non Microsoft" folks harder, be it Linux user, Mac user,...
Microsoft's continued influence now costs a lot of peope a lot of money, nerves, lost opportunities,... and IMO now sometimes even outweights the benefits we're getting for this big price.
In recent years there is also this issue with security, but for the sake of your question we can assume that this topic is part of point [1] of my answer.
Fedora, statring few months/years ago and finaly delivered in Fedora Core 6, build its virtualization infrastructure on Xen.
While their solutions seems good, it did not convince me because my simple test to run FC6 i386 guest under FC6 x86_64 host using this Xen solution failed (hopefully not because of me but because of lack of support for such scenario). I hope this KVM is better in that regard (i386 under x86_64)?
Well, I can promise you that Bill Gates will fulfill his promise by the end of the year.
It's simple - by the end of the year Christmas Spending Frenzy will be over so there will be little point in sending current amount of SPAM.
And who is going to say that "we're just back where we were few months ago" or "SPAM is still there and is the problem", well, those are just facists, terrorists, fanatics, Linux zealots,... spreading their lies.:)
Side note: Mr. Gates will also fulfill his promis at the end of year 2007, 2008, 2009,...,...,... I do not know exact end of this sequence while I do not know, how long does Mr. Gates plan to live and fight the SPAM. Also I do not know who will replace him after that.
That looks like an interesting idea, to just "do the job" and (presumably) "leave the responsibility and conscience to the boss". If the boss is moraly consistent (and compatible with his employees) and he is also responsible, than such job attitude may work.
Problem is, some bosses are neither responsible (they ussusaly are but only to themselves) nor moraly sound. And if employees "just do the job" for such boss, this one boss drags a lot of such employees down with him to the level, where those employees would not want to be.
So yes:
Most people have a threshold though.
And they should enforce it for the sake of preserving their own self (or soul or whatever you call it). Otherwise their own self cease to exist and their ideas and world-view will be replaced by that of their boss.
I used some vote-web-assistant before last election in Slovakia few months ago and I found it very helpfull.
At the end I did vote as the assistant recommended (even if I originaly did not plan to) because thanks to this advice I contacted the party recommended and get some good response from them.
Of course, I do not deem such assistants as "100% correct" (given all the bias: politicians "lying" in their program, assistant author making some maybe even deliberate "mistakes", etc.) but I consider them as good information value for the effort spent (especialy if compared to watching debates in TV, reading a lot of pages of political programs,...).
And a rhumba line of lawyers will all collect the fees, ultimately from consumers.
But there is a chance for customers so that they do not have to foot the bill.
IMO those lawsuits are "investment" for the companies: they are financing it in hopes to later obtain income thanks to it and that income will cover this "investment" and gives also some bonus. Also lawyers are (at least partialy) being paid after the case (more precisely: after the successfull case).
So, at the end, if the customers does not buy the products employing contested patents, they wont be footing bill for this legal battle and the cost will remain with the companies and lawyers thus depleting their savings.
I really wonder who the guy who thought that up was thinking when he woke up...
Money, of course.
As 'miro f' wrote it, this person was thinking about "vendor lock in" which is a scheme to get more money for less work and also a scheme to keep others for getting "rightfully yours money" by doing "your" work (presumably better than you).:)
To sum the above: Keep-alive reuses one TCP connection to download multiple objects from the server thus saving you the time and resources to send extra packets needed to close current connection and establish new one.
Pipelining is helping you to reduce the latency by taking this concept a little bit further and issuing your next request before the response for previous request has been fully received.
At the end you have just one pipe to push that data even if you have say 100 connections.
By still having one pipe with certain capacity (i.e. bandwidth) but increasing amount of connections, you're wasting your bandwidth for maintenance of multiple connections.
Also you're wasting the resources of the server for the same reason.
At the end, you're slowing yourself down.
Yes, there are scenarios where using for example 4 connections as opposed to just 1 yields better download performance but AFAIK almost all such scenarios are very specific for given implementation of webserver, given implementation of network, given implementation of browser,...
So to sum myself up: I think that the 1-2 active connections per client as mentioned in RFC 2616 was generaly valid in 1997, is generaly valid now and also will be generaly valid in the future.
Contrary, "the hack" of using multiple connections to speed-up downloads may have been, is and may be in the future sometimes valid but generaly degrades performance.
Pity is, Aaron Hopkins is mentioning true solution (HTTP pipelining) only as "(Optional)" and at total end of the article. But he correctly describe his previous propositions as "tricks".:)
At the same time, I've made a very explicit decision not to have children. My impact on the planet will thus be over in under a century.
Well, that's nice of you.
Assuming you wont deviate from your decision (either willingly or by accident) it realy is one possible solution to resolve global warming: humans die off.
But this solution has same weak point as other solutions mentioned either in the article or in the/. discussions: it wont work if not applied globaly.
So unless you convince the rest of those 6.5 bilion people out there to not to have children you should better start looking for a job nearer to your house. Because either people start doing something (like rising tax on diesel) or they dont (and we run out of diesel without sufficient replacement).
Aww, sorry, it wont help you. Even if you convince others not to have children, it will at least keep the consumption at current levels and IMO "the shit will hit the fan" sooner that you die.
What topics, examples and questions do you think would stimulate a heated discussion on intellectual property rights which would display the complexities of both sides of the issue?
Slashdot Mirror
In the same way as your description of your perception of people in Microsoft apply to Microsoft - you wrote it confuses you that some people claim Microsoft is evil claiming there arre good (not evil) people there. In response I speculated based on your post, advancing it along this path:
Of course I'm not going to insist there is mathematical pecission nor exact logic in this. I even do not insist this is some kind of reasoning nor correct explanation of your dilema.
I'm just suggesting possibilities.
Maybe. But for example also people who make peace by starting war looks to me as having same deficiency.
:)
I.e. something like "fuzzy loging" or "intuitive decisions" or "estimate" or whatever: great feature of our mental powers but also source of fataly wrong decisions in some cases.
Links to follow: The Cerebral Symphony, We're Only Human..., ...
Those links may not be the best for this topic but I'm unable to quickly find the one I was wanting for this. Sorry. :/
Maybe it has something to do with the saying:
Road to hell is paved with good intentions.
Or take a look a look at story covered in following post: UK Greens Declare Vista Bad For Environment - maybe the attempt to give customers "better experience" and also "satisfying *IAA" is supported by good intentions but here you are: at least greens consider it evil.
Just to be precise: you forgot to mension that you are also paying for this upgrade, err priviledge. :)
Peter F. Hamilton uses the term "squirt" in his books too. Meaning something along the lines of "sending copy of some data from one device to another via some short-range optical interface using red light".
Based also on Large FLOSS Study Gets the Real Facts (more specificaly Economic impact of FLOSS on innovation and competitivness of EU ICT sector, page 102:
Q: Can you be as productive in OpenOffice as MS Office?
A: YES - more than 20%, YES but some problems - almost 60%, NO - under 10%)
I can say YES.
Exactly!!!
And "exatly" are just some sounds or graphical symbols I copied from someone (I guess from my firts or second teacher of english, while english is not my mother-tongue).
If you do not want something to be copied, do not tell it, do not write it. Maybe in the future you should also forget it ASAP so that you wont broadcast it accidentaly with your brain using EM waves or something which others my pick-up.
:)
You tell them, Troll!
:)
Now, I'm awaiting my moderation of this meta-discussion.
Sorry if I waste anyones time or mod-points but frankly, some moderations are quite ... questionable and I see that StikyPad's post #17654484 is still at score 2, Troll. Which is IMO unfair.
Nice to read your comment.
I sometimes think that a lot of problems nowdays exists because everyone ussualy interacts with strangers even if the matter is quite important.
Look for example at the problem of somebody robbing your appartment/house. If I'm not mistaken, it is more probable in big city than in small village. Maybe it's because in a big city, you know almost noone, not even your neighbours. In a small village, everybody knows everybody and it is much harder to rob someone elses house being mistaken by neigbour as "maybe some new guy moved in, or some family visiting, ...".
So, if my line of thinking is correct, your advice may be the solution for a lot of todays problems: do not make business with strangers and you get less fraud, less cheating, less lies, ... and generaly less problems.
Yup, nice film reference.
I myself used film reference in discussion related to this article.
That reminds me of an article here on /. about NSA or something looking at movies for predictions about threats to national security. I'm unable to find the article so maybe I do not remember correctly.
But still, there are a lot of things to learn from movies and books. Even stories for little children contain some knowledge in addition to entertainment. But it looks like that people after certain age fail to realize that and that's why "grown-ups" call such things "entertainment".
And maybe that's also the reason why only minority of people fail to see anything bad on proposals like described in this article even after seeing Brazil, 1984, Enemy of the State, ...
I assume that by "Americans" you mean "US government agencies".
As we have opportunity to read for example this: DHS Gets Another "F" In Cyber Security, I have to point out that such information will be (if not alredy is) available also to non-government and non-US and also non-agencies.
Some people said/wrote, that privacy is alredy dead so the solution would be for everybody to be able to wach everybody else. Such solution would also include ability of ordinary people to watch police, of course. Not like now, where police can watch anybody but nobody can watch police - see Enemy of the State, quote at the end: "and who is going to watch the watchers of watchers ...?".
First, I have to repeat what othes alredy stated (for themselves): I do not hate Microsoft, nor Bill Gates. I just avoid them and sometimes wish they cease to exist ASAP (I do not want to kill them, but rather want them to move on, enyoy the money they made so far and stop interfering with my life).
Why:
I've been using MS DOS on i286 and i386 (Pascal, assembler, games,
Then I used Windows 3.1 (Pascal,
Well, Windows 95 come (I've used it for programming and games etc.), but stability did not improve much.
And then come year 1997 when I heard that this so called Linux is more stable than Windows. I gave it a try and it was true. That helped me realize that yes, with i386 and later 32-bit CPUs it is possible to implement a stable OS but Microsoft is not able to do that.
From that time I used Linux more and more.
The only think I do undestand so far (at least I hope) is the fact, that I'm unable to understand it - like with women: a man is, it looks like, unable to understand a woman.
Microsoft's continued influence now costs a lot of peope a lot of money, nerves, lost opportunities,
In recent years there is also this issue with security, but for the sake of your question we can assume that this topic is part of point [1] of my answer.
Well thank you.
You certainly sped-up my experiments with KVM. :)
Thank you again.
What does this news mean to Fedora?
Fedora, statring few months/years ago and finaly delivered in Fedora Core 6, build its virtualization infrastructure on Xen.
While their solutions seems good, it did not convince me because my simple test to run FC6 i386 guest under FC6 x86_64 host using this Xen solution failed (hopefully not because of me but because of lack of support for such scenario). I hope this KVM is better in that regard (i386 under x86_64)?
Well, I can promise you that Bill Gates will fulfill his promise by the end of the year.
It's simple - by the end of the year Christmas Spending Frenzy will be over so there will be little point in sending current amount of SPAM.
And who is going to say that "we're just back where we were few months ago" or "SPAM is still there and is the problem", well, those are just facists, terrorists, fanatics, Linux zealots, ... spreading their lies. :)
Side note: Mr. Gates will also fulfill his promis at the end of year 2007, 2008, 2009, ..., ..., ... I do not know exact end of this sequence while I do not know, how long does Mr. Gates plan to live and fight the SPAM. Also I do not know who will replace him after that.
That looks like an interesting idea, to just "do the job" and (presumably) "leave the responsibility and conscience to the boss". If the boss is moraly consistent (and compatible with his employees) and he is also responsible, than such job attitude may work.
Problem is, some bosses are neither responsible (they ussusaly are but only to themselves) nor moraly sound. And if employees "just do the job" for such boss, this one boss drags a lot of such employees down with him to the level, where those employees would not want to be.
So yes:
And they should enforce it for the sake of preserving their own self (or soul or whatever you call it). Otherwise their own self cease to exist and their ideas and world-view will be replaced by that of their boss.
I used some vote-web-assistant before last election in Slovakia few months ago and I found it very helpfull.
At the end I did vote as the assistant recommended (even if I originaly did not plan to) because thanks to this advice I contacted the party recommended and get some good response from them.
Of course, I do not deem such assistants as "100% correct" (given all the bias: politicians "lying" in their program, assistant author making some maybe even deliberate "mistakes", etc.) but I consider them as good information value for the effort spent (especialy if compared to watching debates in TV, reading a lot of pages of political programs, ...).
But there is a chance for customers so that they do not have to foot the bill.
IMO those lawsuits are "investment" for the companies: they are financing it in hopes to later obtain income thanks to it and that income will cover this "investment" and gives also some bonus. Also lawyers are (at least partialy) being paid after the case (more precisely: after the successfull case).
So, at the end, if the customers does not buy the products employing contested patents, they wont be footing bill for this legal battle and the cost will remain with the companies and lawyers thus depleting their savings.
But it is hard not to buy "bad" products.
Money, of course.
As 'miro f' wrote it, this person was thinking about "vendor lock in" which is a scheme to get more money for less work and also a scheme to keep others for getting "rightfully yours money" by doing "your" work (presumably better than you). :)
I took a look at the site you mentioned (specificaly first page and their's tour) and all the statements of the people are from between 1992 and 2000.
Then in section "MISSING VIRUS" there is latest entry, I quote:
And latest news entries are from 2002 too.
So, while those pages about AIDS looks good and correct, they lack fresh content and may be by now (2006) even incorrect.
Do you have links to some more up-to-date content?
What happened to that Alex Russel reward offering? What are the latest news>? ...
Well, your statement is correct for HTTP/1.0 and also would be correct for HTTP/1.1 if:
Please take a look for example at HTTP/1.1 Connections and HTTP/1.1 Pipelining FAQ and also maybe some TCP/IP RFCs.
To sum the above: Keep-alive reuses one TCP connection to download multiple objects from the server thus saving you the time and resources to send extra packets needed to close current connection and establish new one.
Pipelining is helping you to reduce the latency by taking this concept a little bit further and issuing your next request before the response for previous request has been fully received.
At the end you have just one pipe to push that data even if you have say 100 connections.
By still having one pipe with certain capacity (i.e. bandwidth) but increasing amount of connections, you're wasting your bandwidth for maintenance of multiple connections.
Also you're wasting the resources of the server for the same reason.
At the end, you're slowing yourself down.
Yes, there are scenarios where using for example 4 connections as opposed to just 1 yields better download performance but AFAIK almost all such scenarios are very specific for given implementation of webserver, given implementation of network, given implementation of browser, ...
So to sum myself up: I think that the 1-2 active connections per client as mentioned in RFC 2616 was generaly valid in 1997, is generaly valid now and also will be generaly valid in the future.
Contrary, "the hack" of using multiple connections to speed-up downloads may have been, is and may be in the future sometimes valid but generaly degrades performance.
Pity is, Aaron Hopkins is mentioning true solution (HTTP pipelining) only as "(Optional)" and at total end of the article. But he correctly describe his previous propositions as "tricks". :)
Easter Island's End
Well, that's nice of you.
Assuming you wont deviate from your decision (either willingly or by accident) it realy is one possible solution to resolve global warming: humans die off.
But this solution has same weak point as other solutions mentioned either in the article or in the /. discussions: it wont work if not applied globaly.
So unless you convince the rest of those 6.5 bilion people out there to not to have children you should better start looking for a job nearer to your house. Because either people start doing something (like rising tax on diesel) or they dont (and we run out of diesel without sufficient replacement).
Aww, sorry, it wont help you. Even if you convince others not to have children, it will at least keep the consumption at current levels and IMO "the shit will hit the fan" sooner that you die.
One example: Andreas Pavel - 'father' of the portable personal stereo cassette player.