With mplayer allegedly about to go 1.0, Duke Nukem Forever supposedly releasing in May, and E17 libraries declaring 1.0, one simply must assume that Samba 4 and Hurd would *finally* release sometime this year too.
I can't see what the hell text is link and what is just text. Some people say the color difference is sufficient on unread and on read impossible, which is bad enough, but I have a hard time telling the unread links from the text (maybe because I'm color blind?)
I will also say that I would not mind: -Something akin to/dev/disks./dev/sd is still there, but/dev/disks/ provide convenient schemes to find the 'right' sd in a complicated environment. If there were a simple utility that given 'ifnamefor em0' spews out 'eth0', that would be fine. You could *not* enumerate an interface multiple times in ifconfig/ip output, would have to be a separate utility. -As others mentioned, using bios information to dictate eth order. Consume the onboard nics 'in order', then the pci ports 'in order', and so on.
Yes, sometimes in a multi-homed server, the ordering gets confusing. *however* if trying to write a script to operate on a range of heterogeneous systems, 'eth0', etc is more likely to work than 'em0','pci0',etc. Most places that do have confusing names compensate by one of the following: -Using ethtool to see what driver manages it and deal with it that way (basically mimicking this design), but this has the same issues, which lead many places to do the second option. -Detecting what subnet they are via DHCP and using that information to find the 'right' nic for something or other.
In multi-homed systems, the bios-dictated topology is usually less important than the IP topology.
There is a chance that they stumbled upon something useful without having a clue how it works, therefore unable to produce a good paper on it. Notably 'cold fusion' appears likely to have nothing to do with it.
You didn't provide the data on wealth distribution to compare and contrast. The tax contribution ratio is meaningless without knowing how the overall wealth got distributed. If hypothetically top 10% control 90% of the wealth, then 70% wouldn't be rationally a fair share.
The other issue is this is measuring the 'fairness' of being wealthy solely on tax contribution. The major problem is the people on top get to carve the pie and hand it out, opting to hand themselves a disproportionately large share. This is the *key* issue of those disgruntled with the situation. Mumblings about sketchy accounting and tax loopholes are there, but the real outrage comes when you see execs giving themselves huge bonuses, *especially* when that happens directly because they laid off people. Sometimes this manifests as people wanting to balance this by 'unfairly' taxing the wealthy, which is their only practical strategy to correct the natural unfair tendency for wealth to gather at the top in purely capitalist systems. One could say in theory consumers could control this through their purchasing decisions, but in practice people are either unaware or unwilling to enact meaningful boycotts, the former because its nearly impossible to know what products fuel the imbalance more than others and the latter because even when armed with this knowledge, they know their small contribution is nothing by itself and larger short-term needs drive their purchasing decisions instead. I personally know executives making 7 figures. They are more lucky than skilled, and simply aren't worth their pay. I also know some presidents that keep their *total compensation* capped in the 200-300k range and make sure the rest goes into their employees. 200k-300k is still pretty damn wealthy, and you have a much healthier company if you direct resources it earns into enriching the company instead of leeching.
I'm not sure I parsed your sentence correctly, but Apple was not the most successful, innovative IT company. They were successful and arguably innovative, but as a consumer electronics company, not as an IT company. Sure, they have mac pros and also call them tower servers, but it's not even a blip on the radar relative to the major players in the field or any one of their iTunes, iPhone, iPod, iPad revenue streams. Retiring their only rackmount offering was the first step, fully expect Apple to give up even the pretense of OSX as a server and potentially even the 'Pro' products if it means more to funnel into their iOS platforms.
I said *I* wouldn't mind. I know my router is IPv6 ready. What you say may hold true for many customers, and it's a real problem to get those customers to upgrade, but I was talking about just me personally, with the presumption that an ISP with incentive could find a way to get their typical user to upgrade their device.
I know how easy dual stack is to do in small scale, and how easy tunneling is, but that's pointless for the ISP, because they save *nothing* and that leaves a chicken-and-egg situation.
I'm not merely talking out of my ass, I do have fairly large amounts of in-depth knowledge of IPv6, have applied it, and have seen the practical concerns in the professional networking world that are largely ignored as 'theoretically' not a problem.
The fact I pointed out NAT64 should have made my point clear, and no highway analogy could even compare. IPv6 did not save them from IPv4 deployments. Everyone needed IPv4, so IPv6 was just a seemingly wasteful second network to maintain. NAT64 rendered the IPv6 resources worth it because IPv6 would have been sufficient for everything.
I admittedly haven't seen much new Sun gear in places even before the takeover, and have heard some complaints about service problems after the Oracle acquisition. Oracle software, however, still has a very large presence with no sign of slowing. Oracle DB software is still deployed even in a whole lot of places where PostgreSQL or MySQL would be perfectly sufficient.
IBM I don't see as losing any clout in the enterprise space. The only mainframe game to speak of (legacy is a large reason for it, but those systems also churn massive IO performance compared to anything else even if the processing power isn't overwhelming), the biggest Unix vendor with continued heavy investment in their offering (almost by default from everyone else giving up), and an x86 server business that is very healthy. Of course, the big dollars are in their services group, just like every one else profitable in the industry.
They care about the 'commodity' stuff, and HP and IBM trade back and fourth for '#1' in that space, and even if margins are low on the systems (but still no where near as slim as many x86 vendors), they make gobs in services and such.
Calling HP the 'new' giant is odd given they are not particularly any more giant than they were a month ago, or a year ago.
People could have been doing that but they didn't. So here we are.
Problem was it greated more work without benefit. You had to do IPv4 *and* v6. NAT64 changes that. Now I wouldn't mind my ISP taking away my IPv4 and giving me an IPv6 subnet instead, so long as they provide a decent, nearby NAT64 gateway.
It would be cheaper to have unique press of disc per client with embedded serial in data than a hardware dongle. Hardware dongles are orders of magnitude more expensive than a disc. Even uniquely 'burned' discs are far too expensive for their tastes and they'd rather burden the user and keep mass-production pressing process in place.
They would have to say all used markets are 'wrong' to justify their whining about used games. Ford doesn't see money for a used Taurus being sold, a homebuilder sees no revenue from a used house sale, and so on for any random second hand thing on craigslist. Video games are not magically more entitled than any other industry.
It's not that IPv6 is intrinsically incapable, it's that having an A and a AAAA record for www.yahoo.com will cause a non-trivial number of clients that either have bad dual-stack implementations or somehow got a route advertised that really doesn't work all the way to try to use the IPv6 approach instead of IPv4.
Since netflix doesn't do a shipping surcharge per disk, the shipping is no more dedicated to a specific user than streaming. AFAIK, they do unicast streaming, so each concurrent user is getting dedicated throughput.
I don't know about your area, but in this area, blockbuster has thoroughly gone extinct in terms of brick and mortar presence. Basically, netfilx is the only offering currently doing both streaming and nationwide disc access. Now you could do one company for streaming, and redbox for another.
I also seem to recall some idea for Blockbuster to do Redbox like kiosks, but streaming video and letting people walk away with them on customer provided flash memory instead of on discs.
The problem is that only Blackberry is actually bringing forth anything remotely like that (only seen in their playbook demos thusfar). Android and iOS still have crappy management that still fails to make the state of things intuitively obvious and concrete.
This is not merely historical because it *still* isn't fixed in the rest of the world. It may seem like a trivial thing to people who don't have it, but it's pretty damn annoying when it isn't there.
I agree it's hardly encouraging for the market in general that everyone else's is so poor that the feature comes as a great thing.
But if you are being disparaging on WebOS, it's a sign of the overall polish and consistent vision they brought forward. That vision may or may not have survived the HP acquisition, that remains to be seen, but it was a hell of a lot more consistent than Android has had to date (Honeycomb might rectify some of that). iOS also implement a consistent vision, but one I personally don't like.
That's the first place I tried on the Android handset. However, it gave me little more than simple on/off, whereas WebOS gave me a submenu of available devices to pair to immediately. I could not do that from the menu. When I needed more, the submenu took me straight to the correct application. The Android menu did nothing, and the owner had to tell me to run the settings application to find the stuff beyond the menu.
The fact that anyone paid money for their garbage OS is amazing
If you are referring to WebOS, the technical merits are tremendous. The only phone on the market with a sane interaction for managing running applications. Blackberry seems to be looking to change that, but most others either still avoid real multitasking or make no intuitively obvious representation that makes clear the difference between running, suspended, or closed applications.
I'm still a webOS fan, and will give it a chance to keep me in their February announcement, though I am afraid that HP completely missed the point and caused a whole lot of brain drain that could very well sink whatever slim chance webOS has.
Slashdot Mirror
With mplayer allegedly about to go 1.0, Duke Nukem Forever supposedly releasing in May, and E17 libraries declaring 1.0, one simply must assume that Samba 4 and Hurd would *finally* release sometime this year too.
My password of hunter2 was not compromised.
Underline the links.
I can't see what the hell text is link and what is just text. Some people say the color difference is sufficient on unread and on read impossible, which is bad enough, but I have a hard time telling the unread links from the text (maybe because I'm color blind?)
I will also say that I would not mind: /dev/disks. /dev/sd is still there, but /dev/disks/ provide convenient schemes to find the 'right' sd in a complicated environment. If there were a simple utility that given 'ifnamefor em0' spews out 'eth0', that would be fine. You could *not* enumerate an interface multiple times in ifconfig/ip output, would have to be a separate utility.
-Something akin to
-As others mentioned, using bios information to dictate eth order. Consume the onboard nics 'in order', then the pci ports 'in order', and so on.
Do both of these and make everyone happy.
Or something like the /dev/disks/ hierarchy.
eth0, etc etc still as is, but a way to trivially enumerate the names they want to the 'eth' names.
This 'solves' one problem but creates another.
Yes, sometimes in a multi-homed server, the ordering gets confusing. *however* if trying to write a script to operate on a range of heterogeneous systems, 'eth0', etc is more likely to work than 'em0','pci0',etc. Most places that do have confusing names compensate by one of the following:
-Using ethtool to see what driver manages it and deal with it that way (basically mimicking this design), but this has the same issues, which lead many places to do the second option.
-Detecting what subnet they are via DHCP and using that information to find the 'right' nic for something or other.
In multi-homed systems, the bios-dictated topology is usually less important than the IP topology.
There is a chance that they stumbled upon something useful without having a clue how it works, therefore unable to produce a good paper on it. Notably 'cold fusion' appears likely to have nothing to do with it.
Someone writing it up along those lines:
http://blog.newenergytimes.com/2011/01/19/rossi-and-focardi-lenr-device-probably-real-with-credit-to-piantelli/
Hard to tell.
The problems I have are:
You didn't provide the data on wealth distribution to compare and contrast. The tax contribution ratio is meaningless without knowing how the overall wealth got distributed. If hypothetically top 10% control 90% of the wealth, then 70% wouldn't be rationally a fair share.
The other issue is this is measuring the 'fairness' of being wealthy solely on tax contribution. The major problem is the people on top get to carve the pie and hand it out, opting to hand themselves a disproportionately large share. This is the *key* issue of those disgruntled with the situation. Mumblings about sketchy accounting and tax loopholes are there, but the real outrage comes when you see execs giving themselves huge bonuses, *especially* when that happens directly because they laid off people. Sometimes this manifests as people wanting to balance this by 'unfairly' taxing the wealthy, which is their only practical strategy to correct the natural unfair tendency for wealth to gather at the top in purely capitalist systems. One could say in theory consumers could control this through their purchasing decisions, but in practice people are either unaware or unwilling to enact meaningful boycotts, the former because its nearly impossible to know what products fuel the imbalance more than others and the latter because even when armed with this knowledge, they know their small contribution is nothing by itself and larger short-term needs drive their purchasing decisions instead. I personally know executives making 7 figures. They are more lucky than skilled, and simply aren't worth their pay. I also know some presidents that keep their *total compensation* capped in the 200-300k range and make sure the rest goes into their employees. 200k-300k is still pretty damn wealthy, and you have a much healthier company if you direct resources it earns into enriching the company instead of leeching.
I'm not sure I parsed your sentence correctly, but Apple was not the most successful, innovative IT company. They were successful and arguably innovative, but as a consumer electronics company, not as an IT company. Sure, they have mac pros and also call them tower servers, but it's not even a blip on the radar relative to the major players in the field or any one of their iTunes, iPhone, iPod, iPad revenue streams. Retiring their only rackmount offering was the first step, fully expect Apple to give up even the pretense of OSX as a server and potentially even the 'Pro' products if it means more to funnel into their iOS platforms.
I said *I* wouldn't mind. I know my router is IPv6 ready. What you say may hold true for many customers, and it's a real problem to get those customers to upgrade, but I was talking about just me personally, with the presumption that an ISP with incentive could find a way to get their typical user to upgrade their device.
I know how easy dual stack is to do in small scale, and how easy tunneling is, but that's pointless for the ISP, because they save *nothing* and that leaves a chicken-and-egg situation.
I'm not merely talking out of my ass, I do have fairly large amounts of in-depth knowledge of IPv6, have applied it, and have seen the practical concerns in the professional networking world that are largely ignored as 'theoretically' not a problem.
The fact I pointed out NAT64 should have made my point clear, and no highway analogy could even compare. IPv6 did not save them from IPv4 deployments. Everyone needed IPv4, so IPv6 was just a seemingly wasteful second network to maintain. NAT64 rendered the IPv6 resources worth it because IPv6 would have been sufficient for everything.
I admittedly haven't seen much new Sun gear in places even before the takeover, and have heard some complaints about service problems after the Oracle acquisition. Oracle software, however, still has a very large presence with no sign of slowing. Oracle DB software is still deployed even in a whole lot of places where PostgreSQL or MySQL would be perfectly sufficient.
IBM I don't see as losing any clout in the enterprise space. The only mainframe game to speak of (legacy is a large reason for it, but those systems also churn massive IO performance compared to anything else even if the processing power isn't overwhelming), the biggest Unix vendor with continued heavy investment in their offering (almost by default from everyone else giving up), and an x86 server business that is very healthy. Of course, the big dollars are in their services group, just like every one else profitable in the industry.
They care about the 'commodity' stuff, and HP and IBM trade back and fourth for '#1' in that space, and even if margins are low on the systems (but still no where near as slim as many x86 vendors), they make gobs in services and such.
Calling HP the 'new' giant is odd given they are not particularly any more giant than they were a month ago, or a year ago.
People could have been doing that but they didn't. So here we are.
Problem was it greated more work without benefit. You had to do IPv4 *and* v6. NAT64 changes that. Now I wouldn't mind my ISP taking away my IPv4 and giving me an IPv6 subnet instead, so long as they provide a decent, nearby NAT64 gateway.
Sure it is... with NAT64
It would be cheaper to have unique press of disc per client with embedded serial in data than a hardware dongle. Hardware dongles are orders of magnitude more expensive than a disc. Even uniquely 'burned' discs are far too expensive for their tastes and they'd rather burden the user and keep mass-production pressing process in place.
They would have to say all used markets are 'wrong' to justify their whining about used games. Ford doesn't see money for a used Taurus being sold, a homebuilder sees no revenue from a used house sale, and so on for any random second hand thing on craigslist. Video games are not magically more entitled than any other industry.
We have the precedent of the PC in place for comparison.
Some gems exist in the open source or free world, but overwhelmingly they are outnumbered by professional efforts.
It's not that IPv6 is intrinsically incapable, it's that having an A and a AAAA record for www.yahoo.com will cause a non-trivial number of clients that either have bad dual-stack implementations or somehow got a route advertised that really doesn't work all the way to try to use the IPv6 approach instead of IPv4.
Since netflix doesn't do a shipping surcharge per disk, the shipping is no more dedicated to a specific user than streaming. AFAIK, they do unicast streaming, so each concurrent user is getting dedicated throughput.
I don't know about your area, but in this area, blockbuster has thoroughly gone extinct in terms of brick and mortar presence. Basically, netfilx is the only offering currently doing both streaming and nationwide disc access. Now you could do one company for streaming, and redbox for another.
I also seem to recall some idea for Blockbuster to do Redbox like kiosks, but streaming video and letting people walk away with them on customer provided flash memory instead of on discs.
The problem is that only Blackberry is actually bringing forth anything remotely like that (only seen in their playbook demos thusfar). Android and iOS still have crappy management that still fails to make the state of things intuitively obvious and concrete.
This is not merely historical because it *still* isn't fixed in the rest of the world. It may seem like a trivial thing to people who don't have it, but it's pretty damn annoying when it isn't there.
I agree it's hardly encouraging for the market in general that everyone else's is so poor that the feature comes as a great thing.
But if you are being disparaging on WebOS, it's a sign of the overall polish and consistent vision they brought forward. That vision may or may not have survived the HP acquisition, that remains to be seen, but it was a hell of a lot more consistent than Android has had to date (Honeycomb might rectify some of that). iOS also implement a consistent vision, but one I personally don't like.
That's the first place I tried on the Android handset. However, it gave me little more than simple on/off, whereas WebOS gave me a submenu of available devices to pair to immediately. I could not do that from the menu. When I needed more, the submenu took me straight to the correct application. The Android menu did nothing, and the owner had to tell me to run the settings application to find the stuff beyond the menu.
The fact that anyone paid money for their garbage OS is amazing
If you are referring to WebOS, the technical merits are tremendous. The only phone on the market with a sane interaction for managing running applications. Blackberry seems to be looking to change that, but most others either still avoid real multitasking or make no intuitively obvious representation that makes clear the difference between running, suspended, or closed applications.
I'm still a webOS fan, and will give it a chance to keep me in their February announcement, though I am afraid that HP completely missed the point and caused a whole lot of brain drain that could very well sink whatever slim chance webOS has.