So, the big bad government has come and made your life a living hell... What can I say... I could make some witty comment about globalization, world economies, foreign policy, tarriffs, and maybe a few other points. I won't, because I'm not an economist and I doubt that you are either. Really, if you want to oversimplify it all down to the government screwing you over, then have at it.
Re:Mod submitter -1, Troll
on
Java Is So 90s
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Two points:
1. Having Microsoft release more software that supports their platform doesn't make the platform's industry support any better intrinsicly. So unless you can say companys x, y, and z are all moving strongly behind.NET, then great. I don't know the.NET ecosystem, so I don't know if there are any non-ms vendors pushing.NET based technologies.
2. Just because I disagree with your argument, I do agree that Microsoft based.NET initiatives are growing and not shrinking as grandparent assumed. But, there is a natural evolution of Microsoft products that one must also pay attention to. Much of the developer attention to Microsoft technologies would have been there with visual studio 7 even if.NET didn't exist.
I think the 'more' interesting finding is that Microsoft has been unable to seriously penetrate these Java / Web markets as much as they'd have liked. All they've done is create a third fraction of the modern development market. Most coders these days fall into three buckets: Java developer, Web developer,.NET developer. See? They haven't made Web developer mean ASP.NET, they haven't made Application programmer mean C# develoeper, etc.. As things stand, they can only hope to maintain their current business's migration cycle without too much bleeding. This may change with radical shifts in their business model, but as of today, MS can't expect.NET technologies to dominate the developer market.
(Warning, Ad Hominem alert) Man, I just love listening to Libertarians. You've always got such a colorful way of looking at things. I often disagree with your talking points, but you always make it entertaining for me to read =)
Just to add *some* sort of rebuke to the above, the US has been quite generous about throwing away UN spearheaded initiatives in the past. You may think that many drafts they've produced are useless, or simply bad ideas, but enough people thought that it was the right to vote them in use.
Some UN proposals that the US ignored (Metrc, Radio Spectrum allocations) are simply unmitigated disasters, and others (international courts, kyoto) just tend to piss off your neighboring countries hearing about your whining.
I name some well known examples of this, but it all comes down to one basic point. The US can and will ignore any UN charter that they don't agree with. You may be punished in trade for it, but its still fair.
Now, if you doin't like draft xyz coming out of the UN, there isn't any extra level of beaurocracy in the decision making process. You either cooperatively agree on a world standard, or you ignore the standard and do what you like. Its the national level making the decision, so there isn't any more dilution of your voice.
We have one large regional telco that interconnects most cities in our area and they don't pay for their peering. There's also city carrier that supplys end-point access to many city businesses. This city carrier has peer access to many different regional networks but they pay for their agreements. The small guy's peers just don't have enough financial interest in the link to give it away for free.
A data carrier makes their money off the small guys that want to plug into the heavily funded infrastructure that the big guys have spent much time building up. If you have two equally sized carriers with equal data being sent/received to the other network, it makes perfect sense to peer them. Since they both have to bridge the gap to one another's network somehow, its cheaper to go directly to one another.
Now, lets say the data flow rate isn't symetric. TinyISP and UberISP. TinyISP uses 100Mb/s on UberISP's network, but UberISP only uses 1.2Mb/s on Tiny's network. UberISP wouldn't feel inclined to allow a peering agreement since most of the financial benefit is happening by TinyISP.
Now with all that said, your argument is only partially correct. Yes, "The internet will see that as damage and route around it" can happen, but it isn't the magical sugar plum fairy granting magical bandwidth to route this traffic. Its Cogent footing the bill to L3 or some other peer in order to get to their intended recipients. Thats if L3 hasn't blocked the Cogent Netblocks as well. In which case, Cogent would be forced to have a peer Source-NAT their traffic if they wanted to reach L3 resources. Thankfully, To my knowledge this crazy scenerio has never occured.
ICANN is the 'offical' governing body of the internet framework, but it is a not-for-profit company, and has no real teeth. The depatement of comerce, a US governmental department says that they control domain names, and that ICANN has no real power over what ICANN manages.
The EU sees this as a threat since they are basically depending on the US government to maintain economic and social stability for all. I don't see a problem with this. If they can divide the IP blocks into multiple regions, I don't see the harm in doing it for DNS names. As long as everyone gets along and the systems blend together, no harm to me.
Speaking of media server, I was in Bestbuy waiting for the salesman to pack up my Grandvega (Woo!) and I decided to play around with a DTV with a Windows Media Center box.
All I can say is wow, this is crap. Within 10 minutes, I crashed the front-end (reboot) and the interface was not straight-forward as I recall.
I don't want to blatently bash MS unless its warrented, but I must say, this product was NOT production ready and should never have been sold.
The SIN card you have in your phone is tied to your provider. The provider paid millions/billions to license a GSM band in the US.
The technology that actually powers this is inhibitivly expensive. If you wanted to hack your own non-rules based GSM station, then you'll have to worry about the FCC and anyone else not liking you break the law.
It'd be more feasible to hack in a second antenna, talk circuit into your cell. I don't see it being easy even on bulky phones, but its possible.
For me, Vancouver IT is where its at. Don't talk about Calgary for housing though. Vancouver houses cost on average $400k and condos regularly go for $250k. In comparison, the average Calgary home for single families is: $276,776.
*sigh* I guess I'll never find an affordable condo...
You have to look at their chief competition in the market to see what's going down. AKA: Redhat vs. Solaris. Solaris is effectively given away without a support contract. Funny, same with Redhat. They've got the exact same price point. Of course, Sun has a hardware token to add to the mix, but Redhat seems to have more community support (despite all the Slashdot trolling).
I would say having a handy-dandy cheat sheet for common commands would be invaluable. Just write a function called help and have information like: Copy - cp Move - mv Help using a command - Man...
you get the idea. Otherwise, everyone'll be requisitioning the newb command line books all at the same time. At least with a built-in reference, they don't need paper.
The described concepts are base components of a more usable system.
The most important component that I see is the off-screen compositing engine. Basically, X can create and store an 'image' of every window on an active session. With that, you can add cool things like in the mac, being able to see a snapshot of all running programs on the screen shrunk.
1. I believe apple patented this, but I could be mistaken
2. I don't really see how this is a productivity gain. Maybe I'm just missing the point
3. Once again, I fail to see how this useful. Unless the UI enhancement is simple, it won't fly for normals.
I don't think leading X11 down some utopian UI for a select few people will do much good.
Floppy windows are a nice concept, and I imagine it was created as proof of concept for the underlying technologies used.
PPC support doesn't have anything to do with dual booting. It means that the OS can physically run on the system as long as the hardware's been prepared for the OS.
This is performed by a boot loader, which also allows you to boot multiple OS's. I found http://www.linuxworld.com/story/47809.htm?DE=1 to be an interesting read.
I thought that Hubs were L1 devices, but only when they don't have multiple speeds. Eg. If I have a 100BT hub that only runs at 100BT, then its a true hub and would be an L1 broadcast style route.
I fully agree though that when dealing with hubs that are for instance 10/100BT then they are forced to concider how to slot in each request between backplanes. The 10 devices work as a single hub, and the 100 devices work as another hub. There is also switching logic which bridges the two together. Usually the uplink port will receive all traffic regardless of which speed its linked on.
1. I 'think' the parent post was implying the steps involved with totally installing an OS from scratch till the point its fully working. If debian was missing some key drivers that takes a lot of web sites to solve, it could easily drag on for quite some time to solve all the issues. Thats from someone that knows what they're doing. 'users' are just SOL.
2. Requirements gathering 101 What do you want an OS to do? If you want a very secure OS, you install an SELINUX Linux distro with strict. If you want a secure OS, you can learn to not use root unless you have to. If you want a system thats simpler than that, you use a distro that has root-user.
It may not be a 'good' security solution, nobody is asserting that, but you can't deny that a system that doesn't have security has less holes to jump through.
^^ Marked troll? My Arse. I litterally block every single RPC mechanism on the Web. Who leaves open SMB/CORBA/SOAP/UPNP/LDAP unless its absolutely necessary due to product functionality. Can someone please tell me how my comment is faulty and how SOAP is now immune to all attacks?
Not proprietary, but well patented. EG: "RSA WS-Security: SOAP Message Security Patent License Agreement Instructions
RSA Security has identified four patents ("the RSA Patents") we believe could be relevant to implementing certain operational modes of the OASIS WS-Security: SOAP Message Security specifications. To obtain a reciprocal royalty free license to the RSA Patents to make, use and sell products conforming to the OASIS WS-Security: SOAP Message Security specifications, a customer or partner must sign the attached Patent License Agreement."
So what you're saying is that Americans can commit genocide, invade anyone without cause, kill innocent children and somehow it isn't an international problem?
Please do me a favor and read the charter before you spout off about how its eroding your rights.
From their charter: "For the purpose of this Statute, "crime against humanity" means any of the following acts when committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population, with knowledge of the attack:"
One soldier murdering another are not grounds for international crime. One soldier killing an armed civilian isn't eitehr. Fire bombing civilians and soldiers would be.
Get your head out of that as of yours. If you want to punish real criminals transparently (in the eyes of the world), this would be the venue to do it. I'm sure guantanamo works fine for you, but not for the rest of us.
The US was the only major nation in the world to not support the international court. Why you ask? Because they wanted to exempt American citizens from being held to the same standards as the rest of the world. *gasp* you say.
XEON based Intel solutions have had extended RAM support for years. There's nothing new with Intel based systems having more than 4GB or ram. You just need an OS that supports the PAE extension. This boosts the memory capacity of the OS from 4GB (32bit) to 64GB (36bit). Linux and Windows have supported PAE for quite a while. (Microsoft artificially disables the ram based on the version of windows you're using)
The difference between 32bit w/PAE and 64bit is that a program running on the 32bit OS will only access a maximum virtul memory space of 4GB, while a program running on the 64bit variant can access the entire virtual memory space that the OS can.
If you're running a 32bit compiled app on a 64 bit processor, you're also limited to the 4GB space as well.
I wanna bump the parent of this post. I find Supermicro boards to be very good quality. I've never had issues with Linux support on their boards. If there aren't Linux drivers on the board, they're usually downloadable from the component's vendor (Intel,...).
Plus, for a 'vanilla' setup, the supermicro's are very price friendly. They're usually within the 400-1000 cad range with nice rack cases running around the same price range.
Slashdot Mirror
Umm, ok.
So, the big bad government has come and made your life a living hell... What can I say... I could make some witty comment about globalization, world economies, foreign policy, tarriffs, and maybe a few other points. I won't, because I'm not an economist and I doubt that you are either. Really, if you want to oversimplify it all down to the government screwing you over, then have at it.
Two points:
.NET, then great. I don't know the .NET ecosystem, so I don't know if there are any non-ms vendors pushing .NET based technologies.
.NET initiatives are growing and not shrinking as grandparent assumed. But, there is a natural evolution of Microsoft products that one must also pay attention to. Much of the developer attention to Microsoft technologies would have been there with visual studio 7 even if .NET didn't exist.
.NET developer. See? They haven't made Web developer mean ASP.NET, they haven't made Application programmer mean C# develoeper, etc.. As things stand, they can only hope to maintain their current business's migration cycle without too much bleeding. This may change with radical shifts in their business model, but as of today, MS can't expect .NET technologies to dominate the developer market.
1. Having Microsoft release more software that supports their platform doesn't make the platform's industry support any better intrinsicly. So unless you can say companys x, y, and z are all moving strongly behind
2. Just because I disagree with your argument, I do agree that Microsoft based
I think the 'more' interesting finding is that Microsoft has been unable to seriously penetrate these Java / Web markets as much as they'd have liked. All they've done is create a third fraction of the modern development market. Most coders these days fall into three buckets: Java developer, Web developer,
(Warning, Ad Hominem alert) Man, I just love listening to Libertarians. You've always got such a colorful way of looking at things. I often disagree with your talking points, but you always make it entertaining for me to read =)
Just to add *some* sort of rebuke to the above, the US has been quite generous about throwing away UN spearheaded initiatives in the past. You may think that many drafts they've produced are useless, or simply bad ideas, but enough people thought that it was the right to vote them in use.
Some UN proposals that the US ignored (Metrc, Radio Spectrum allocations) are simply unmitigated disasters, and others (international courts, kyoto) just tend to piss off your neighboring countries hearing about your whining.
I name some well known examples of this, but it all comes down to one basic point. The US can and will ignore any UN charter that they don't agree with. You may be punished in trade for it, but its still fair.
Now, if you doin't like draft xyz coming out of the UN, there isn't any extra level of beaurocracy in the decision making process. You either cooperatively agree on a world standard, or you ignore the standard and do what you like. Its the national level making the decision, so there isn't any more dilution of your voice.
We have one large regional telco that interconnects most cities in our area and they don't pay for their peering. There's also city carrier that supplys end-point access to many city businesses. This city carrier has peer access to many different regional networks but they pay for their agreements. The small guy's peers just don't have enough financial interest in the link to give it away for free.
A data carrier makes their money off the small guys that want to plug into the heavily funded infrastructure that the big guys have spent much time building up. If you have two equally sized carriers with equal data being sent/received to the other network, it makes perfect sense to peer them. Since they both have to bridge the gap to one another's network somehow, its cheaper to go directly to one another.
Now, lets say the data flow rate isn't symetric. TinyISP and UberISP. TinyISP uses 100Mb/s on UberISP's network, but UberISP only uses 1.2Mb/s on Tiny's network. UberISP wouldn't feel inclined to allow a peering agreement since most of the financial benefit is happening by TinyISP.
Now with all that said, your argument is only partially correct. Yes, "The internet will see that as damage and route around it" can happen, but it isn't the magical sugar plum fairy granting magical bandwidth to route this traffic. Its Cogent footing the bill to L3 or some other peer in order to get to their intended recipients. Thats if L3 hasn't blocked the Cogent Netblocks as well. In which case, Cogent would be forced to have a peer Source-NAT their traffic if they wanted to reach L3 resources. Thankfully, To my knowledge this crazy scenerio has never occured.
Maybe not in America, but go to Korea and he's probably a frigging statue of something! Really I kid, but I think you're way off here.
Just because tons of people don't know who the hell Kurosawa was doesn't mean that movies are any less 'cool', or have any lesser impact in society.
Re-read the facts.
ICANN is the 'offical' governing body of the internet framework, but it is a not-for-profit company, and has no real teeth. The depatement of comerce, a US governmental department says that they control domain names, and that ICANN has no real power over what ICANN manages.
The EU sees this as a threat since they are basically depending on the US government to maintain economic and social stability for all. I don't see a problem with this. If they can divide the IP blocks into multiple regions, I don't see the harm in doing it for DNS names. As long as everyone gets along and the systems blend together, no harm to me.
Its coming,r ess_releases_-_2004/Going_On_Air.htm
http://www.sita.aero/News_Centre/Press_releases/P
Speaking of media server, I was in Bestbuy waiting for the salesman to pack up my Grandvega (Woo!) and I decided to play around with a DTV with a Windows Media Center box.
All I can say is wow, this is crap. Within 10 minutes, I crashed the front-end (reboot) and the interface was not straight-forward as I recall.
I don't want to blatently bash MS unless its warrented, but I must say, this product was NOT production ready and should never have been sold.
Don't waste your time.
The SIN card you have in your phone is tied to your provider. The provider paid millions/billions to license a GSM band in the US.
The technology that actually powers this is inhibitivly expensive. If you wanted to hack your own non-rules based GSM station, then you'll have to worry about the FCC and anyone else not liking you break the law.
It'd be more feasible to hack in a second antenna, talk circuit into your cell. I don't see it being easy even on bulky phones, but its possible.
For me, Vancouver IT is where its at. Don't talk about Calgary for housing though. Vancouver houses cost on average $400k and condos regularly go for $250k. In comparison, the average Calgary home for single families is: $276,776.
*sigh* I guess I'll never find an affordable condo...
You have to look at their chief competition in the market to see what's going down. AKA: Redhat vs. Solaris. Solaris is effectively given away without a support contract. Funny, same with Redhat. They've got the exact same price point. Of course, Sun has a hardware token to add to the mix, but Redhat seems to have more community support (despite all the Slashdot trolling).
I would say having a handy-dandy cheat sheet for common commands would be invaluable. Just write a function called help and have information like: ...
Copy - cp
Move - mv
Help using a command - Man
you get the idea. Otherwise, everyone'll be requisitioning the newb command line books all at the same time. At least with a built-in reference, they don't need paper.
The described concepts are base components of a more usable system.
The most important component that I see is the off-screen compositing engine. Basically, X can create and store an 'image' of every window on an active session. With that, you can add cool things like in the mac, being able to see a snapshot of all running programs on the screen shrunk.
1. I believe apple patented this, but I could be mistaken
2. I don't really see how this is a productivity gain. Maybe I'm just missing the point
3. Once again, I fail to see how this useful. Unless the UI enhancement is simple, it won't fly for normals.
I don't think leading X11 down some utopian UI for a select few people will do much good.
Floppy windows are a nice concept, and I imagine it was created as proof of concept for the underlying technologies used.
PPC support doesn't have anything to do with dual booting. It means that the OS can physically run on the system as long as the hardware's been prepared for the OS.
This is performed by a boot loader, which also allows you to boot multiple OS's. I found http://www.linuxworld.com/story/47809.htm?DE=1 to be an interesting read.
http://www.ibiblio.org./
I thought that Hubs were L1 devices, but only when they don't have multiple speeds. Eg. If I have a 100BT hub that only runs at 100BT, then its a true hub and would be an L1 broadcast style route.
I fully agree though that when dealing with hubs that are for instance 10/100BT then they are forced to concider how to slot in each request between backplanes. The 10 devices work as a single hub, and the 100 devices work as another hub. There is also switching logic which bridges the two together. Usually the uplink port will receive all traffic regardless of which speed its linked on.
1. I 'think' the parent post was implying the steps involved with totally installing an OS from scratch till the point its fully working. If debian was missing some key drivers that takes a lot of web sites to solve, it could easily drag on for quite some time to solve all the issues. Thats from someone that knows what they're doing. 'users' are just SOL.
2. Requirements gathering 101
What do you want an OS to do?
If you want a very secure OS, you install an SELINUX Linux distro with strict.
If you want a secure OS, you can learn to not use root unless you have to.
If you want a system thats simpler than that, you use a distro that has root-user.
It may not be a 'good' security solution, nobody is asserting that, but you can't deny that a system that doesn't have security has less holes to jump through.
^^ Marked troll? My Arse. I litterally block every single RPC mechanism on the Web. Who leaves open SMB/CORBA/SOAP/UPNP/LDAP unless its absolutely necessary due to product functionality. Can someone please tell me how my comment is faulty and how SOAP is now immune to all attacks?
Not proprietary, but well patented.
EG:
"RSA WS-Security: SOAP Message Security Patent License Agreement Instructions
RSA Security has identified four patents ("the RSA Patents") we believe could be relevant to implementing certain operational modes of the OASIS WS-Security: SOAP Message Security specifications. To obtain a reciprocal royalty free license to the RSA Patents to make, use and sell products conforming to the OASIS WS-Security: SOAP Message Security specifications, a customer or partner must sign the attached Patent License Agreement."
I imagine there are more of these out there..
Yet another Microsoft(and company) protocol to block from my firewall (* Worms bound to ensue *)
So what you're saying is that Americans can commit genocide, invade anyone without cause, kill innocent children and somehow it isn't an international problem?
u rn al/Rome_Statute_120704-EN.pdf
Please do me a favor and read the charter before you spout off about how its eroding your rights.
http://www.icc-cpi.int/library/about/officialjo
From their charter: "For the purpose of this Statute, "crime against humanity" means any of the following acts
when committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian
population, with knowledge of the attack:"
One soldier murdering another are not grounds for international crime. One soldier killing an armed civilian isn't eitehr. Fire bombing civilians and soldiers would be.
Get your head out of that as of yours. If you want to punish real criminals transparently (in the eyes of the world), this would be the venue to do it. I'm sure guantanamo works fine for you, but not for the rest of us.
Example,
The US was the only major nation in the world to not support the international court. Why you ask? Because they wanted to exempt American citizens from being held to the same standards as the rest of the world. *gasp* you say.
"A: "Legitimize" is a word I don't"...
XEON based Intel solutions have had extended RAM support for years. There's nothing new with Intel based systems having more than 4GB or ram. You just need an OS that supports the PAE extension. This boosts the memory capacity of the OS from 4GB (32bit) to 64GB (36bit). Linux and Windows have supported PAE for quite a while. (Microsoft artificially disables the ram based on the version of windows you're using)
The difference between 32bit w/PAE and 64bit is that a program running on the 32bit OS will only access a maximum virtul memory space of 4GB, while a program running on the 64bit variant can access the entire virtual memory space that the OS can.
If you're running a 32bit compiled app on a 64 bit processor, you're also limited to the 4GB space as well.
I wanna bump the parent of this post. I find Supermicro boards to be very good quality. I've never had issues with Linux support on their boards. If there aren't Linux drivers on the board, they're usually downloadable from the component's vendor (Intel, ...).
Plus, for a 'vanilla' setup, the supermicro's are very price friendly. They're usually within the 400-1000 cad range with nice rack cases running around the same price range.