It's amazing how willing people are to justify the actions in question here. Yes, maybe the copyright laws in this country are antiquated and immoral, but there is no doubt within most sane minds that these ARE legal statutes passed by a government we have all elected into office.
So, let's talk about the particular justifications brought into play in this post:
- no, the RIAA isn't trying to "spread fear/resentment/anger" amongst the audience they're trying to "win back". They're not trying to win back the minority population that are major-abusers of their copyrights. They're trying to scare'em into inactivity. They couldn't care less if every one of the 261 people subpoenaed never, ever buy another RIAA-associated music record again.
- Songs being played on the radio are effectively advertisements for the record, which contains other songs that will not be played on the radio (not to mention the 'brand' of the artist). It's like saying... if they show the trailer to a movie for FREE, then why would they charge me money to watch the rest of the movie?
- Eminem might've done well, but that doesn't prove anything. After all, the contention by the RIAA is that Eminem (and the record companies) isn't that they didn't profit from their record... but rather that they would have profited MORE if not for the abuse of their copyrights.
Your analysis is incredibly informative. No idea as to the final outcome of course... but it's perfectly possible, I believe, to have "ownership" over property without retaining all of the rights to that property.
Obvious examples include exclusive distributorship licenses that exist for everything ranging from books to movies. Or, in the case of real estate, leasehold rights.
Even though the makers of Gigli retains ownership of the movie asset (which is also not 'real' property, similar to source code), they do not have the rights to show the movie publically. It is the distributor that now owns the rights to do so.
Ownership of an asset, despite common experience, does not imply right to use the asset in any way you choose.
I think a lot of folks here have been focused on the Linux/desktop issue for so long that they're not understanding what really drives Microsoft: $$$$. (Well, I assume everyone *knows* that... but not sure how many understand it.)
The CLR has two implications.
The first many have commented on... hardware abstraction. Applications compiled for the CLR will be able to run on a wide-variety of different (but similar) platforms... but is this really of long-term value? Are there a lot of applications begging to run unmodified on your enterprise server AND your Palm? Doubtful. Hardware abstraction makes good engineering sense in the sense that it saves future development, but I don't see it as much of a market-stealing development.
Will Microsoft have an advantage over Intel? The ability to move away in the future? Newsflash, it already has that advantage. x86 is, for all intents and purposes, an open standard implemented by a variety of hardware manufacturers (down to AMD and Intel at the top-end.. for now). How will CLR give it more of a death-grip? As someone else said, this aspect of the CLR is equivalent to the HAL.
No, I believe it's the second implication that Microsoft really cares about: multiple language interoperability.
The market Microsoft is going after with CLR is really the enterprise computing market. There is an awful lot of existing business logic written in a wide range of language offerings, and the value in capturing that market is huge. Microsoft is making this move on the basis of a prediction on where enterprise software is headed over the next 5-10 years.
Different pieces of logic (within different systems) are begging (so M$ believes) to interoperate within a single application server, within a single runtime. XML/SOAP/Web services is a basic solution for cross-process interoperability... but what's going to run on the *back* end? Within the same process, with shared rules for security/type-safety, object/thread pools, garbage collection, and shared state?
Java threatened to be the default language to which business logic/applications/"Web services" were about to be built with... which obviously would represent a threat to Microsoft's position. Microsoft made a valiant effort to head this off with COM/COM+, but quickly realized that the fundamentally C++ nature of COM+ was making it not attractive enough for business developers.
The introduction of CLR is trying to change that. Multiple languages, multiple types, multiple run-time semantics... standardized in to one run-time. C++ objects making calls on Java objects making calls on COBOL logic...
.... that's the vision of CLR, and why the focus of the CLR paper is about the language features of the CLR, *not* the 'generalized hardware' nature of the hardware.
Not only is it a question of multiple front-ends compiling to the same bytecode language,.NET allows multiple source languages to compile *with* this shared intermediate language.
.NET allows you to inherit from a Java class in C++, and then override a method of the C++ class in some object-COBOL code.
I won't speculate on the value of this to real enterprise application environments (frankly, I have no idea).. but it IS awfully cool.
I think the 'value' of NanoProbes has already been properly revealed by the other Slashdot posters. He's sending minimalist ICMP packets with appropriate flags. Considering there's only a small subset of allowed IP header options/flags out there, a very small number of trained monkeys typing on a typewriter could have emulated his creation. Or, at worst, a lab of third-year undergraduates would be able to match his efforts in hours.
I actually chose to look at the GENESIS system in more detail as well ("A Simple TCP/IP Implementation Enhancement to Eliminate DoS Vulnerability").
And yet again, I am stunned by a) the high degree of shameless self-promotion in this 'article', b) the complete lack of technical sophistication needed to develop a real solution to a difficult (really, unsolvable in this form) problem.
To save./ers from wasting 15 minutes they'll never get back on that article: his modified server TCP/IP stack does not acquire any server state when the SYN packet from the client first arrives, instead choosing to wait until the ACK from the server SYN/ACK is returned. (There then follows some mildly clever schemes for preventing ACK-flooding attacks using encryption, while preserving IP semantics associated with the sequence number).
So, what's the problem? Well, there's actually a *reason* IP stacks are designed to allocate server resources when the original SYN packet is received. When the client (the creator of the original connection) receives the SYN/ACK response from the server, it now assumes the connection has been created and begins transmitting data (potentially significant) to the server. In fact, if it uses a variant of IP optimizations where the window size opens at a significant large size, this could represent multiple packets transmitted to the server before the connection is actually made.
The server is still waiting for that ack to the SYN/ACK. When the packet from the client arrives, it then tries to allocate server-side resources... and what if those resources do not exist at this time? The connection must be aborted, meaning that the data already transmitted over the pipe by the client is discarded. And worst of all, this violates IP semantics since one party assumes the connection is established before it is truly made.
Applications built on top of IP could very reasonably design optimal behavior with that assumption in mind. For example, a client could use exponential back-off in case the server is loaded (and its connection is rejected) on its next connection, minimizing server load. If the client can not determine whether the server is loaded (since it believes falsely the connection has been established), the client might immediately attempt anothre connection.
In short, I know nothing about the author of these articles, but I strongly suggest you take his comments with a *huge* grain of salt. The lack of technical maturity and content only accentuates his distasteful attitude and tone.
could you please analyze the economic collapse of the Soviet Union into the Russian Republic? Or perhaps a comparative analysis of the economic development over the past 30 years of communist Cuba (despite American embargo) with the other 'free market' economies of central and south America?
First of all, I don't believe for a second this issue can be broken down into a simple analysis of right-wrong. There are definitely fuzzy boundaries here, and quite likely everyone will form their own opinions on whether Coremetrics or their clients are behaving in a moral and proper manner.
That said, from the rough description given here, Coremetrics is providing an out-sourced service that seems completely legitimate. I'd also argue that Toysrus and others are completely within their rights to keep this out of their privacy policies, as long as they were not negligent in protecting the privacy they promised their users (and the contractual agreement on data-ownership would seem to suggest that they are not being negligent).
If I call up customer service, there is a very high probability that the person answering the phone is provided by an out-sourced phone support agency. Do they need to explain to me that they aren't actually employeed by Foobar.com before taking my credit card order? As long as they're acting as agents of Foobar.com, and as long as Foobar.com has taken reasonable measures to protect my privacy (again, legal restrictions are the best you can ask for), I have no issues with this.
Back in the online world... what if your pages are actually being served by Akamai? Are they also a 'third-party' that gets access to your private data? Most likely.
What if the web-site is hosted by an ASP (like Loudcloud or Jamcracker)? Clearly they have complete access to your private information at all times as well.
What if the databases your data were stored on are backed up using out-sourced storage servers?
The privacy policy should clearly indicate all distribution of your personal data to other external parties. Firms that act as agents of a third company in handling your data should be aware that the privacy policy of the parent company (and any other promises made by the parent company) should be considered binding over their behavior as well, but it makes little sense that they must be disclosed to the user as well.
You are correct, they EMPTIED their lungs before going through the window. I think that attention to detail, however minor it might be, shows that these guys weren't interested in producing a movie for 8 year olds.
The movie was intelligent and funny, if not both at the same time.
This movie's plot-line is worse than predictable. While the end-game is clear from the first five minutes the movie, there were many inconsistencies that made no sense to the careful watcher.
But you know what? Who cares! The movie is just incredibly entertaining. I left the theatre feeling good about myself, the movie, Titan, Bob, and everything else thrown up on the big-screen. The humor definitely hit a chord with me.
I do get the sense that many of the folks bashing the movie are doing it based on the simple premise that it's another 'wanna-be' trashing the genre. It is so far from the truth. Remember all those great saturday morning cartoons and late-night movies that DEFINED the genre? V? Robotech? This isn't crass commercialism. This is simply an interesting, amusing, and most important of all, ENTERTAINING movie for those willing to immerse themselves (pretend you're 13 again... toss the cynicism on the floor, Katz).
I'll probably need to ask this again (and other related stuff) when part 2 comes up, but I'd love to find out why you guys made some of the design decisions you made... I'm sure it'd be instructive for all.
For example, why are the servers serving images and static files segmented? Is there a lot you save from Apache configuration for dealing with one as compared to the other?
Where does MySQL sit? Any "reason" behind Debian vs. RH other than "just because"?
Also, any chance you could go through some of the configuration choices made for your apache processes on each of these? What's your startup script look like (how many processes do you bring up)? No, I'm not lookin' to own slashdot, I'm just curious whether there are any *must-dos* and *must-don'ts* involved.
To a limited degree this is indeed possible, and there has been past work on this. Most of it has been based on the analogy of intrusion detection being similar to our immune systems (detecting unfamiliar proteins/traffic and use patterns). Wish I had the papers handy, but I don't.
Clearly the semantics of the Windows file system dictates a certain type of behavior. There's absolutely no ambiguity here at all: the OS would do copy-on-write. All of this talk about symbolic links is confusing you, this action is intended to be transparent to the user.
and I haven't been following GPG's development. What's the algorithm here if it's not using RSA for public-key cryptography? Am I just totally clueless about the ways of the crypto-world?
I find it easy to imagine a non-DES symmetric key algorithm...but why is it I always had the impression that RSA was the only viable solution for public-key crypto out there?
If you are interested/able to enroll in a PhD level program, the "expense" of a school like MIT/Stanford/CMU will not play a factor. All of the top-tier (and I'm sure most programs in general) institutions will guarantee your financial status. Some (such as MIT) are unwilling to put down their guarantees on paper, but the de facto policy is that as long as you remain on track for your degree, you will not have difficulties paying for your education (as in full tuition paid as well as a reasonable $12,000-20,000 stipend per year). You might have to work as a TA or RA, depending on the school, to qualify for such funding, but it is almost always available.
There are a lot of lower-tier graduate schools that are excellent in everything else. If you don't think you can get in the top-tier, apply for Princeton or Harvard. They have (more than) acceptable graduate programs, and you have the advantage of a nice looking line on your resume.
One final comment, STANFORD APPLICATIONS ARE DUE EARLY!! If you only knew how many people didn't even bother applying because it's hard to meet their deadline (early December)...
Why does an "on-line" labor commission demand equal pay and working conditions?
Standards of living WITHIN a nation can often differ, and yet most nations have methods that try to combat this. Obviously the same United States government rules over Watts and Beverly Hills, and I don't understand why the situation would be any different on a global sense. Does the US labor commission demand that Watts plumbers have identical work pay and conditions as those in Beverly Hills? Doubtful.
Any political system can be established, and regardless of whether this particular group is doing it correctly or not, I fail to understand why an intelligent/democratic virtual nation can't be created.
It's an very interesting concept for a number of reasons... and most important of all, it is promising in its applications.
The world's current configuration as a mostly uni-polar system (with the United States being the sole super-power) is due to the concentration of military power in one location (obviously). But increasingly, this configuration can be challenged by opposing poles that represent concentrations of technical and financial power!
Imagine a CyberSystem that had a defense force, capable of attacking electronically the infrastructure of nations that threatened the rights/existence of the system. Such a threat is no less dangerous (and possibly even more so) than thousands of tons of TNT.
Imagine a CyberSystem that had a viable economic system, where citizens are taxed in some fair manner to support common infrastructure development... i.e. more cryptographic support, stronger political presence... Such a system could use many of the economic tools of today's "modern" nations to find a place for existence. It's clear that the United States is already dependent on the technocrats. Let's formalize that relationship such that the US militarily/politically defend the rights of this CyberNation in exchange for beneficial economic terms.
You can think of this as an extension of Neal Stephenson's Cryptonomicon. Most citizens in the first world no longer have to fear for their personal safety, but we DO need a political/financial safe haven. If we band together successfully, such a scheme really might have promise.
This CyberWorld could also be considered an experimental platform for alternate political systems. Presumably, its citizens would include some of the most talented, best educated, and financially well-off people on the planet. Instead of being stuck in the traditional cycles of autocracy and representative 'democracy', maybe it's time to test the system of the future.
Only problem with this is that it is intended as a virtual "Yugoslavia". The political connotations/attachment to the previous incarnations of Yugoslavia is probably not needed.
Opinions? Anyone think such a virtual utopia is really possible? Isn't it time to leverage our technical abilities to achieve new levels of political and social development?
I wrote to Leo Donnelly, one of the network engineer/admins at Harvard (as quoted in the original email), and he informed me that the files are NOT (no longer?) being destroyed.
To quote...
All of the site's data is being returned to the owner. An offical statement will be released later today. NO data was destroyed and the owner is aware the data is being returned.
If you're telling me that 80% of 750 million people (600 million), mostly not from Europe and America, who have never owned a computer before... can run Linux?
Yeah right. Something similar to the iMac would be much more conceivable, or a severely stripped down version of Linux that doesn't require users patch their kernel manually, doesn't require users to compile their kernel manually...
Until someone provides Linux-lite, a complete commercialized product that is about 1000 times easier to install, use, and upgrade than Red Hat is right now, there's no way Linux will make the head-way you or RMS are predicting.
I received my bachelors in computer science from Berkeley last year, and am currently pursuing a graduate degree in computer science at MIT.
My impression at both schools is that computer science is *huge* and growing. I know that at Berkeley, acceptance is done by a purely quantative process first where all students are rated by grades and the top fraction admitted, with the rest considered manually (i.e., essay reading, experience, extracurricular experiences...)... Well, of the top 1200 students on the quantative scale university-wide last year, a full 600 applied for acceptance into the computer science and electrical engineering program. That's pretty scary.
Here at MIT, although I haven't had a lot of experience with the undergraduate program, hearsay and some stat checking seems to confirm that a very, very significant fraction of students here are studying computer science.
I don't understand it at all. I honestly don't; I just have a hard time believing that the number of undergraduate computer science degrees awarded is decreasing. To be fair, the text of the article mentions "technical" degrees, and as someone mentioned, this might apply to a number of other engineering degrees instead of computer science.
I found it HIGHLY suspicious... that when asked who's room the diary was found in... as well as other minor details about the investigation, the sheriff department's spokesman responded with... "It's an ongoing investigation. And we really can't comment about any aspect of it."
Yet others are walking around claiming that they already know the date was selected based on Hitler's birthday? This is merely hours after finding the document.
I'm sure you've heard the "racist killing" issue has been tossed out the window and discounted now. I think the Hitler issue will follow in the next few weeks.
If you don't see the difference between calling someone a nazi and a homo, you really are a loser.
As far as asking you to "join in"... I couldn't care less. I don't remember asking you to share your stories about how you were going to blow up your school or shoot everyone else around you. The point is for those of us who DID feel that level of rejection and emotional abuse to share our feelings, and for you to understand them.
Good for you your personal experiences aren't like ours. Does that mean you don't believe rape victims should "whine" because you've never been raped?
We're acting intolerant toward you because you're sitting here dismissing our personal experiences and feelings. You're telling us, "What you're feeling is wrong. You ARE either a) insane or b) a loser or c) a homo to feel this way." It'll be a cold day in hell because I sit here and accept that from you.
How do you feel about a rape victim, or a child who had to face physical abuse from their parent... taking up a gun and killing their tormentor? Is it still wrong? Obviously. Do you sympathesize? I know I do...and it's the exact same situation and feeling here.
I think you're trying your hardest to ignore this event as an isolated one... as if somehow these kids were different... as if all of the people on this board don't understand and shouldn't admit we relate to them on some deep emotional level.
DON'T YOU GET IT?? IT'S NOT TRUE!
Read the posts here. Are you actually listening to what people are saying? The fact these people admit they DO relate to them (and I do as well) shows that this is a deeper, more wide-spread situation than the one you'd like to believe. A bunch of "posturing opportunists"? I'm glad you'd like to generalize us all away, but believe it or not, (and if you read some of the heart-breaking torture experiences some of the posters here have shared, you WOULD believe it), we actually feel this way.
Do you think its normal social behavior to "be a meathead"? Don't you think there's an incredible prevalence of meatheads through-out the generations, and through-out the nation? Are you HEARING people say that we relate to each other's experiences? Don't you know, that when you talk about the kid you punched in the arm, that we KNOW what it felt like? That we KNOW what he was thinking? That we KNOW the kind of deep burning humiliation he felt everyday?
This isn't about "changing yourself". I don't think it's hard to admit that every teen in the world wants to be the most popular guy in school, or the prettiest girl at the ball. How? Why ARE there social outcasts? Why don't everybody just..get along..party together..love each other..accept each other? You're telling me the strict social hierarchy that made these two (and the hundreds of thousands of other victims like them) outcasts and prey to constant taunting, bashing... isn't a problem with the system?
There IS a system. It's the system of high school athletes dominating the school. It's the system of student council gaining the attention that every kid dreams of. It's the system of prom and social acceptance that so many are shut out of. And it's finally the system of these kids torturing and abusing others (like you did, intentionally or not) because they saw their older brothers do it..because they saw it on TV.. because they saw it in the movies.. because the cliques that infest our schools have been around since the Happy Days era... because this is A habit..a horrible self-reinforcing loop that means you'll probably teach your kids to be meatheads unknowingly.
Close your eyes if you want to. Close your mind to the hurt that the people here are reflecting, just like you closed your mind to the hurt you yourself was inflicting on the kid you used to punch every day. Think about it; that kid wanted to fight you. If we knew you, we'd want to fight you too.
Do you want to know what would happen? Thank god I wasn't in this situation, but I saw it around me enough to know the facts of how the high school world really worked.
If you were fortunate enough to find a counselor or vice principle that felt for you, or that was interested in doing the right thing (instead of just shushing you up)...
He'd probably first find the other kid and talk to him.. "Why'd you do this? Don't you know it's wrong? You shouldn't be abusing people. I might have to suspect/punish you next time." He might even give the kid an hour of detention. Whee.
The next step, if the kid is completely unapologetic, he might sit both of you down... tell you guys to shake hands.. tell you guys to try to get along.
What else CAN he do? Get a security guard and follow you around? Make him love you? Plan a Hollywood setting where you save the bully's life so that he appreciates you for your true value? Nope. This is it as far as the "help" goes.
What can you expect as a result of this? Well, if we're talking about the real assholes that stalk these halls... You can look forward to having him bump into you every other day (as in..bump into you HARD). You can look forward to pencils or erasers being thrown at you from across the room...coincidentally where he's sitting. You can look forward to constant verbal taunts walking down the halls. You can look forward to having to always look over your shoulder, because leaving your backpack, your jacket, or your books in any place out of sight is just invitation for it to be stolen and destroyed. You better lock up your bike well, because its tires are as good as slashed. You better get a nice car alarm, because you shouldn't be surprised to find the windows bashed in or whatever else. You better get some friends quick to walk home with, unless you want him to jump you with his friends half-way home where no one can provide evidence of what he does to you. You better give up any thoughts of going to a high-school social event. Do you really want your prom date ridiculed? Punch poured on her? Do you really want to go to a football game where the fun is in taunting and laughing at you?
Give it up. Did you notice how you had to resort to a solution (pretending to be a guerrilla fighter) that was very similar to what the kids in Colorado did? Only a matter of degree, dude... a matter of degree and time.
If you can, yeah, you should stand up. Some of these bullies really do persist on nothing beyond intimidation and the need to feel power over you. If you don't give that to him, he can't win and he might give up. But I understand how hard that can be sometimes... I understand the steps they TAKE it. The kind of inner strength it takes to step up and take this kind of abuse and fight back is not something easily found. The real solution is to solve the riddle of our society. To somehow find a way of blurring these clear antagonistic and hierarchal lines that separate us so greatly.
I don't know how long ago you were in high school, but that's not really realistic.
If you're pegged for humiliation by a group of kids, all you can do is try to stay out of sight. Yeah, that's cowardly, but what's the result of what you just said above? You get a gang of kids *out* for blood. They might never push it to the level of assault again, but I don't know how much fun it'd be to get up every morning to find your house tee-peed, to find your bike destroyed, to find your car keyed, to find your backpack stolen after every lunch period...
No, the support system for what you're talking about doesn't exist.
Best of luck to the original poster. I hate to sound cliche, but just "walk away". You should inform someone in authority so that if it ever gets more serious, you have someone to go to...
What does that do, exactly.. put off the situation until tomorrow, when he and his friends jump you with a lead pipe?
And are you supposed to physically attack someone with martial arts if they spit you in the face? What if they call you a name?
I doubt this guy was seriously goin to kill the original poster... the point is the jock was a fuck-head, and it's people like him that incited the ones in Colorado to go out in a ball of flame.
Slashdot Mirror
It's amazing how willing people are to justify the actions in question here. Yes, maybe the copyright laws in this country are antiquated and immoral, but there is no doubt within most sane minds that these ARE legal statutes passed by a government we have all elected into office.
So, let's talk about the particular justifications brought into play in this post:
- no, the RIAA isn't trying to "spread fear/resentment/anger" amongst the audience they're trying to "win back". They're not trying to win back the minority population that are major-abusers of their copyrights. They're trying to scare'em into inactivity. They couldn't care less if every one of the 261 people subpoenaed never, ever buy another RIAA-associated music record again.
- Songs being played on the radio are effectively advertisements for the record, which contains other songs that will not be played on the radio (not to mention the 'brand' of the artist). It's like saying... if they show the trailer to a movie for FREE, then why would they charge me money to watch the rest of the movie?
- Eminem might've done well, but that doesn't prove anything. After all, the contention by the RIAA is that Eminem (and the record companies) isn't that they didn't profit from their record... but rather that they would have profited MORE if not for the abuse of their copyrights.
Your analysis is incredibly informative. No idea as to the final outcome of course... but it's perfectly possible, I believe, to have "ownership" over property without retaining all of the rights to that property.
Obvious examples include exclusive distributorship licenses that exist for everything ranging from books to movies. Or, in the case of real estate, leasehold rights.
Even though the makers of Gigli retains ownership of the movie asset (which is also not 'real' property, similar to source code), they do not have the rights to show the movie publically. It is the distributor that now owns the rights to do so.
Ownership of an asset, despite common experience, does not imply right to use the asset in any way you choose.
I think a lot of folks here have been focused on the Linux/desktop issue for so long that they're not understanding what really drives Microsoft: $$$$. (Well, I assume everyone *knows* that... but not sure how many understand it.)
The CLR has two implications.
The first many have commented on... hardware abstraction. Applications compiled for the CLR will be able to run on a wide-variety of different (but similar) platforms... but is this really of long-term value? Are there a lot of applications begging to run unmodified on your enterprise server AND your Palm? Doubtful. Hardware abstraction makes good engineering sense in the sense that it saves future development, but I don't see it as much of a market-stealing development.
Will Microsoft have an advantage over Intel? The ability to move away in the future? Newsflash, it already has that advantage. x86 is, for all intents and purposes, an open standard implemented by a variety of hardware manufacturers (down to AMD and Intel at the top-end.. for now). How will CLR give it more of a death-grip? As someone else said, this aspect of the CLR is equivalent to the HAL.
No, I believe it's the second implication that Microsoft really cares about: multiple language interoperability.
The market Microsoft is going after with CLR is really the enterprise computing market. There is an awful lot of existing business logic written in a wide range of language offerings, and the value in capturing that market is huge. Microsoft is making this move on the basis of a prediction on where enterprise software is headed over the next 5-10 years.
Different pieces of logic (within different systems) are begging (so M$ believes) to interoperate within a single application server, within a single runtime. XML/SOAP/Web services is a basic solution for cross-process interoperability... but what's going to run on the *back* end? Within the same process, with shared rules for security/type-safety, object/thread pools, garbage collection, and shared state?
Java threatened to be the default language to which business logic/applications/"Web services" were about to be built with... which obviously would represent a threat to Microsoft's position. Microsoft made a valiant effort to head this off with COM/COM+, but quickly realized that the fundamentally C++ nature of COM+ was making it not attractive enough for business developers.
The introduction of CLR is trying to change that. Multiple languages, multiple types, multiple run-time semantics... standardized in to one run-time. C++ objects making calls on Java objects making calls on COBOL logic...
.... that's the vision of CLR, and why the focus of the CLR paper is about the language features of the CLR, *not* the 'generalized hardware' nature of the hardware.
Not only is it a question of multiple front-ends compiling to the same bytecode language, .NET allows multiple source languages to compile *with* this shared intermediate language.
.NET allows you to inherit from a Java class in C++, and then override a method of the C++ class in some object-COBOL code.
I won't speculate on the value of this to real enterprise application environments (frankly, I have no idea).. but it IS awfully cool.
I actually chose to look at the GENESIS system in more detail as well ("A Simple TCP/IP Implementation Enhancement to Eliminate DoS Vulnerability").
And yet again, I am stunned by a) the high degree of shameless self-promotion in this 'article', b) the complete lack of technical sophistication needed to develop a real solution to a difficult (really, unsolvable in this form) problem.
To save ./ers from wasting 15 minutes they'll never get back on that article: his modified server TCP/IP stack does not acquire any server state when the SYN packet from the client first arrives, instead choosing to wait until the ACK from the server SYN/ACK is returned. (There then follows some mildly clever schemes for preventing ACK-flooding attacks using encryption, while preserving IP semantics associated with the sequence number).
So, what's the problem? Well, there's actually a *reason* IP stacks are designed to allocate server resources when the original SYN packet is received. When the client (the creator of the original connection) receives the SYN/ACK response from the server, it now assumes the connection has been created and begins transmitting data (potentially significant) to the server. In fact, if it uses a variant of IP optimizations where the window size opens at a significant large size, this could represent multiple packets transmitted to the server before the connection is actually made.
The server is still waiting for that ack to the SYN/ACK. When the packet from the client arrives, it then tries to allocate server-side resources... and what if those resources do not exist at this time? The connection must be aborted, meaning that the data already transmitted over the pipe by the client is discarded. And worst of all, this violates IP semantics since one party assumes the connection is established before it is truly made.
Applications built on top of IP could very reasonably design optimal behavior with that assumption in mind. For example, a client could use exponential back-off in case the server is loaded (and its connection is rejected) on its next connection, minimizing server load. If the client can not determine whether the server is loaded (since it believes falsely the connection has been established), the client might immediately attempt anothre connection.
In short, I know nothing about the author of these articles, but I strongly suggest you take his comments with a *huge* grain of salt. The lack of technical maturity and content only accentuates his distasteful attitude and tone.
could you please analyze the economic collapse of the Soviet Union into the Russian Republic? Or perhaps a comparative analysis of the economic development over the past 30 years of communist Cuba (despite American embargo) with the other 'free market' economies of central and south America?
First of all, I don't believe for a second this issue can be broken down into a simple analysis of right-wrong. There are definitely fuzzy boundaries here, and quite likely everyone will form their own opinions on whether Coremetrics or their clients are behaving in a moral and proper manner. That said, from the rough description given here, Coremetrics is providing an out-sourced service that seems completely legitimate. I'd also argue that Toysrus and others are completely within their rights to keep this out of their privacy policies, as long as they were not negligent in protecting the privacy they promised their users (and the contractual agreement on data-ownership would seem to suggest that they are not being negligent). If I call up customer service, there is a very high probability that the person answering the phone is provided by an out-sourced phone support agency. Do they need to explain to me that they aren't actually employeed by Foobar.com before taking my credit card order? As long as they're acting as agents of Foobar.com, and as long as Foobar.com has taken reasonable measures to protect my privacy (again, legal restrictions are the best you can ask for), I have no issues with this. Back in the online world... what if your pages are actually being served by Akamai? Are they also a 'third-party' that gets access to your private data? Most likely. What if the web-site is hosted by an ASP (like Loudcloud or Jamcracker)? Clearly they have complete access to your private information at all times as well. What if the databases your data were stored on are backed up using out-sourced storage servers? The privacy policy should clearly indicate all distribution of your personal data to other external parties. Firms that act as agents of a third company in handling your data should be aware that the privacy policy of the parent company (and any other promises made by the parent company) should be considered binding over their behavior as well, but it makes little sense that they must be disclosed to the user as well.
You are correct, they EMPTIED their lungs before going through the window. I think that attention to detail, however minor it might be, shows that these guys weren't interested in producing a movie for 8 year olds.
The movie was intelligent and funny, if not both at the same time.
This movie's plot-line is worse than predictable. While the end-game is clear from the first five minutes the movie, there were many inconsistencies that made no sense to the careful watcher.
But you know what? Who cares! The movie is just incredibly entertaining. I left the theatre feeling good about myself, the movie, Titan, Bob, and everything else thrown up on the big-screen. The humor definitely hit a chord with me.
I do get the sense that many of the folks bashing the movie are doing it based on the simple premise that it's another 'wanna-be' trashing the genre. It is so far from the truth. Remember all those great saturday morning cartoons and late-night movies that DEFINED the genre? V? Robotech? This isn't crass commercialism. This is simply an interesting, amusing, and most important of all, ENTERTAINING movie for those willing to immerse themselves (pretend you're 13 again... toss the cynicism on the floor, Katz).
Loved it, Loved it, Loved it.
I'll probably need to ask this again (and other related stuff) when part 2 comes up, but I'd love to find out why you guys made some of the design decisions you made... I'm sure it'd be instructive for all.
For example, why are the servers serving images and static files segmented? Is there a lot you save from Apache configuration for dealing with one as compared to the other?
Where does MySQL sit? Any "reason" behind Debian vs. RH other than "just because"?
Also, any chance you could go through some of the configuration choices made for your apache processes on each of these? What's your startup script look like (how many processes do you bring up)? No, I'm not lookin' to own slashdot, I'm just curious whether there are any *must-dos* and *must-don'ts* involved.
To a limited degree this is indeed possible, and there has been past work on this. Most of it has been based on the analogy of intrusion detection being similar to our immune systems (detecting unfamiliar proteins/traffic and use patterns). Wish I had the papers handy, but I don't.
Clearly the semantics of the Windows file system dictates a certain type of behavior. There's absolutely no ambiguity here at all: the OS would do copy-on-write. All of this talk about symbolic links is confusing you, this action is intended to be transparent to the user.
and I haven't been following GPG's development. What's the algorithm here if it's not using RSA for public-key cryptography? Am I just totally clueless about the ways of the crypto-world?
I find it easy to imagine a non-DES symmetric key algorithm...but why is it I always had the impression that RSA was the only viable solution for public-key crypto out there?
If you are interested/able to enroll in a PhD level program, the "expense" of a school like MIT/Stanford/CMU will not play a factor. All of the top-tier (and I'm sure most programs in general) institutions will guarantee your financial status. Some (such as MIT) are unwilling to put down their guarantees on paper, but the de facto policy is that as long as you remain on track for your degree, you will not have difficulties paying for your education (as in full tuition paid as well as a reasonable $12,000-20,000 stipend per year). You might have to work as a TA or RA, depending on the school, to qualify for such funding, but it is almost always available.
There are a lot of lower-tier graduate schools that are excellent in everything else. If you don't think you can get in the top-tier, apply for Princeton or Harvard. They have (more than) acceptable graduate programs, and you have the advantage of a nice looking line on your resume.
One final comment, STANFORD APPLICATIONS ARE DUE EARLY!! If you only knew how many people didn't even bother applying because it's hard to meet their deadline (early December)...
Why does an "on-line" labor commission demand equal pay and working conditions?
Standards of living WITHIN a nation can often differ, and yet most nations have methods that try to combat this. Obviously the same United States government rules over Watts and Beverly Hills, and I don't understand why the situation would be any different on a global sense. Does the US labor commission demand that Watts plumbers have identical work pay and conditions as those in Beverly Hills? Doubtful.
Any political system can be established, and regardless of whether this particular group is doing it correctly or not, I fail to understand why an intelligent/democratic virtual nation can't be created.
It's an very interesting concept for a number of reasons... and most important of all, it is promising in its applications.
The world's current configuration as a mostly uni-polar system (with the United States being the sole super-power) is due to the concentration of military power in one location (obviously). But increasingly, this configuration can be challenged by opposing poles that represent concentrations of technical and financial power!
Imagine a CyberSystem that had a defense force, capable of attacking electronically the infrastructure of nations that threatened the rights/existence of the system. Such a threat is no less dangerous (and possibly even more so) than thousands of tons of TNT.
Imagine a CyberSystem that had a viable economic system, where citizens are taxed in some fair manner to support common infrastructure development... i.e. more cryptographic support, stronger political presence... Such a system could use many of the economic tools of today's "modern" nations to find a place for existence. It's clear that the United States is already dependent on the technocrats. Let's formalize that relationship such that the US militarily/politically defend the rights of this CyberNation in exchange for beneficial economic terms.
You can think of this as an extension of Neal Stephenson's Cryptonomicon. Most citizens in the first world no longer have to fear for their personal safety, but we DO need a political/financial safe haven. If we band together successfully, such a scheme really might have promise.
This CyberWorld could also be considered an experimental platform for alternate political systems. Presumably, its citizens would include some of the most talented, best educated, and financially well-off people on the planet. Instead of being stuck in the traditional cycles of autocracy and representative 'democracy', maybe it's time to test the system of the future.
Only problem with this is that it is intended as a virtual "Yugoslavia". The political connotations/attachment to the previous incarnations of Yugoslavia is probably not needed.
Opinions? Anyone think such a virtual utopia is really possible? Isn't it time to leverage our technical abilities to achieve new levels of political and social development?
I wrote to Leo Donnelly, one of the network engineer/admins at Harvard (as quoted in the original email), and he informed me that the files are NOT (no longer?) being destroyed.
To quote...
All of the site's data is being returned to the owner. An offical statement will be released later today. NO data was destroyed and the owner is aware the data is being returned.
If you're telling me that 80% of 750 million people (600 million), mostly not from Europe and America, who have never owned a computer before... can run Linux?
Yeah right. Something similar to the iMac would be much more conceivable, or a severely stripped down version of Linux that doesn't require users patch their kernel manually, doesn't require users to compile their kernel manually...
Until someone provides Linux-lite, a complete commercialized product that is about 1000 times easier to install, use, and upgrade than Red Hat is right now, there's no way Linux will make the head-way you or RMS are predicting.
I received my bachelors in computer science from Berkeley last year, and am currently pursuing a graduate degree in computer science at MIT.
My impression at both schools is that computer science is *huge* and growing. I know that at Berkeley, acceptance is done by a purely quantative process first where all students are rated by grades and the top fraction admitted, with the rest considered manually (i.e., essay reading, experience, extracurricular experiences...)... Well, of the top 1200 students on the quantative scale university-wide last year, a full 600 applied for acceptance into the computer science and electrical engineering program. That's pretty scary.
Here at MIT, although I haven't had a lot of experience with the undergraduate program, hearsay and some stat checking seems to confirm that a very, very significant fraction of students here are studying computer science.
I don't understand it at all. I honestly don't; I just have a hard time believing that the number of undergraduate computer science degrees awarded is decreasing. To be fair, the text of the article mentions "technical" degrees, and as someone mentioned, this might apply to a number of other engineering degrees instead of computer science.
I found it HIGHLY suspicious... that when asked who's room the diary was found in... as well as other minor details about the investigation, the sheriff department's spokesman responded with... "It's an ongoing investigation. And we really can't comment about any aspect of it."
Yet others are walking around claiming that they already know the date was selected based on Hitler's birthday? This is merely hours after finding the document.
I'm sure you've heard the "racist killing" issue has been tossed out the window and discounted now. I think the Hitler issue will follow in the next few weeks.
If you don't see the difference between calling someone a nazi and a homo, you really are a loser.
As far as asking you to "join in"... I couldn't care less. I don't remember asking you to share your stories about how you were going to blow up your school or shoot everyone else around you. The point is for those of us who DID feel that level of rejection and emotional abuse to share our feelings, and for you to understand them.
Good for you your personal experiences aren't like ours. Does that mean you don't believe rape victims should "whine" because you've never been raped?
We're acting intolerant toward you because you're sitting here dismissing our personal experiences and feelings. You're telling us, "What you're feeling is wrong. You ARE either a) insane or b) a loser or c) a homo to feel this way." It'll be a cold day in hell because I sit here and accept that from you.
How do you feel about a rape victim, or a child who had to face physical abuse from their parent... taking up a gun and killing their tormentor? Is it still wrong? Obviously. Do you sympathesize? I know I do...and it's the exact same situation and feeling here.
I think you're trying your hardest to ignore this event as an isolated one... as if somehow these kids were different... as if all of the people on this board don't understand and shouldn't admit we relate to them on some deep emotional level.
DON'T YOU GET IT?? IT'S NOT TRUE!
Read the posts here. Are you actually listening to what people are saying? The fact these people admit they DO relate to them (and I do as well) shows that this is a deeper, more wide-spread situation than the one you'd like to believe. A bunch of "posturing opportunists"? I'm glad you'd like to generalize us all away, but believe it or not, (and if you read some of the heart-breaking torture experiences some of the posters here have shared, you WOULD believe it), we actually feel this way.
Do you think its normal social behavior to "be a meathead"? Don't you think there's an incredible prevalence of meatheads through-out the generations, and through-out the nation? Are you HEARING people say that we relate to each other's experiences? Don't you know, that when you talk about the kid you punched in the arm, that we KNOW what it felt like? That we KNOW what he was thinking? That we KNOW the kind of deep burning humiliation he felt everyday?
This isn't about "changing yourself". I don't think it's hard to admit that every teen in the world wants to be the most popular guy in school, or the prettiest girl at the ball. How? Why ARE there social outcasts? Why don't everybody just..get along..party together..love each other..accept each other? You're telling me the strict social hierarchy that made these two (and the hundreds of thousands of other victims like them) outcasts and prey to constant taunting, bashing... isn't a problem with the system?
There IS a system. It's the system of high school athletes dominating the school. It's the system of student council gaining the attention that every kid dreams of. It's the system of prom and social acceptance that so many are shut out of. And it's finally the system of these kids torturing and abusing others (like you did, intentionally or not) because they saw their older brothers do it..because they saw it on TV.. because they saw it in the movies.. because the cliques that infest our schools have been around since the Happy Days era... because this is A habit..a horrible self-reinforcing loop that means you'll probably teach your kids to be meatheads unknowingly.
Close your eyes if you want to. Close your mind to the hurt that the people here are reflecting, just like you closed your mind to the hurt you yourself was inflicting on the kid you used to punch every day. Think about it; that kid wanted to fight you. If we knew you, we'd want to fight you too.
Do you want to know what would happen? Thank god I wasn't in this situation, but I saw it around me enough to know the facts of how the high school world really worked.
If you were fortunate enough to find a counselor or vice principle that felt for you, or that was interested in doing the right thing (instead of just shushing you up)...
He'd probably first find the other kid and talk to him.. "Why'd you do this? Don't you know it's wrong? You shouldn't be abusing people. I might have to suspect/punish you next time." He might even give the kid an hour of detention. Whee.
The next step, if the kid is completely unapologetic, he might sit both of you down... tell you guys to shake hands.. tell you guys to try to get along.
What else CAN he do? Get a security guard and follow you around? Make him love you? Plan a Hollywood setting where you save the bully's life so that he appreciates you for your true value? Nope. This is it as far as the "help" goes.
What can you expect as a result of this? Well, if we're talking about the real assholes that stalk these halls... You can look forward to having him bump into you every other day (as in..bump into you HARD). You can look forward to pencils or erasers being thrown at you from across the room...coincidentally where he's sitting. You can look forward to constant verbal taunts walking down the halls. You can look forward to having to always look over your shoulder, because leaving your backpack, your jacket, or your books in any place out of sight is just invitation for it to be stolen and destroyed. You better lock up your bike well, because its tires are as good as slashed. You better get a nice car alarm, because you shouldn't be surprised to find the windows bashed in or whatever else. You better get some friends quick to walk home with, unless you want him to jump you with his friends half-way home where no one can provide evidence of what he does to you. You better give up any thoughts of going to a high-school social event. Do you really want your prom date ridiculed? Punch poured on her? Do you really want to go to a football game where the fun is in taunting and laughing at you?
Give it up. Did you notice how you had to resort to a solution (pretending to be a guerrilla fighter) that was very similar to what the kids in Colorado did? Only a matter of degree, dude... a matter of degree and time.
If you can, yeah, you should stand up. Some of these bullies really do persist on nothing beyond intimidation and the need to feel power over you. If you don't give that to him, he can't win and he might give up. But I understand how hard that can be sometimes... I understand the steps they TAKE it. The kind of inner strength it takes to step up and take this kind of abuse and fight back is not something easily found. The real solution is to solve the riddle of our society. To somehow find a way of blurring these clear antagonistic and hierarchal lines that separate us so greatly.
I don't know how long ago you were in high school, but that's not really realistic.
If you're pegged for humiliation by a group of kids, all you can do is try to stay out of sight. Yeah, that's cowardly, but what's the result of what you just said above? You get a gang of kids *out* for blood. They might never push it to the level of assault again, but I don't know how much fun it'd be to get up every morning to find your house tee-peed, to find your bike destroyed, to find your car keyed, to find your backpack stolen after every lunch period...
No, the support system for what you're talking about doesn't exist.
Best of luck to the original poster. I hate to sound cliche, but just "walk away". You should inform someone in authority so that if it ever gets more serious, you have someone to go to...
What does that do, exactly.. put off the situation until tomorrow, when he and his friends jump you with a lead pipe?
And are you supposed to physically attack someone with martial arts if they spit you in the face? What if they call you a name?
I doubt this guy was seriously goin to kill the original poster... the point is the jock was a fuck-head, and it's people like him that incited the ones in Colorado to go out in a ball of flame.