I must say though that Microsoft seems a bit childish about it.
Yea my brother when he was 3 would throw a temper tantrum when he didn't get his way or was being bothered.
Microsoft is LOOSING they are going to go kicking and screaming all the way down! Linux and the *BSDs are eating into them. We haven't hit critical mass yet but in a year or two Microsoft is going to be hurting really really bad!
/. is a thorn in Microsoft's side. The users that/. attracts are, for the most part, very technical and the same people Microsoft wants to assimilate. All this is doing is giving Microsoft a chance to try to bring down/.
These documents are quite easy to find elsewhere. And I don't see how they would seriously be harmed by this. Though they are probably in their right to ask this.
They aren't going to be harmed at all. For all we know Microsoft put the article out there to entrap organizations like/.
Getting down to the point.../. is a thorn is Microsoft's side. It is hurting there business because of the technically oriented content that is commonly posted here, to put it mildly, is severely negative towards them. Not only that it is extremely accurate. I wouldn't be suppressed if there were a couple of tech support calls that/. was brought up in....
Here is a hypothetical situation...
Microsoft Tech support phone call...
Msft - what seems to be the problem
User - Umm its not working
Msft - what isn't working
User - Realplayer with Windows 95 OSR2
Msft - Umm that is the fault of Realplayer
User - Umm... I have very technical data pointing he finger to Microsoft. You can find it at slashdot.org. There is very specific data and quite a few comments from the experts about it.
Msft - Umm... Umm... Umm...
To take out/. would be to Microsofts great advantage. It would hurting the community to which Microsoft is competing. Right now they cannot fight a corporation they are fighting an ideal they have to do something to the comment or Linux and the *BSDs are going to flourish in the corporate world killing Microsoft in the process.
It is this set of victim machines which launches the final attack.
I personally doubt that there is any defence against a propperly executed DDOS attack.
Stefan is not proposing a way to catch the perpetrator, but to locate the computers that are performing the DDoS attack.
As in the article simply put...
The basic idea behind the approach Stefan outlined is for each router that forwards a packet to mark it with information that will allow the recipient of the packet to trace it to it's source.
This is over simplified but in the article he explains a way to mark packets, in a kinda random way, in such a manner as to be able to trace the source and then taking the proper action. Temporarly shutting down the deliquent computer's internet connection.
This would not prevent the DDoS attack but it would speed up the process of shutting it down by removing the human factor in tracing the attacks.
Because there is no difference between a propper DDOS and "The SlashDot Effect."
Yes there is! A DDoS attack is a larg number of computers sending/requesting Massive amounts of information. The "Slashdot Effect" is Massive amounts of computers sending/requesiting moderate amounts of information. Except for large downloads then they are requesting Massive amounts of information, i.e. when netscape pre-6 was announced:)
I don't even know why I am responding to this. I guess it is because I waiting for a big download to finish.
Funny how you are quick to point out how it's unrealistic to expect programmers to understand every aspect of their code, but then seem to support the idea that before microsoft there was "stable" software. Software engineering sucks, inside and outside of Microsoft.
I do expect developers to understand every aspect of their code but not every aspect of others code! There is a difference.
There is also a DIFFERENCE between stable software and programmers understanding every aspect of the project they are working on.
I've worked on projects where not one of the developers, including the tech lead, understood every aspect of the code but it was incredibly stable!
Well my download is complete so I am going to stop wasting my time.
One of the "highlights" in the developer's page talked about how the new release version 6.5 represents Postgres' mastery over the source. What does that mean? According to the developers, it is the first release where they have someone on the team that understands every section of code.
Postgres is a huge project. In any huge or even just a big project you cannot expect every programmer to understand every aspect of the code.
That is why modularity is so important. You can have one person woking/understanding one component and another woking/understanding another component. They do not have to understand eachothers code just the interface to it!
That is why libraries are so popular. I only understand about 1% of the GTK+ code but I can use it quite well. I undrstand very little of the c runtime library code but I can use it quite well. I understand very little of the ptheread library code but I can use it quite well. If I had to fully understand a library's source code it would be better for me to just develop it my self rather than spending the time to understand every line of code and decifering the autor's coding style.
As to your other concerns I haven't found any evidence of it on the postgresql.org web site. If you can please post the links to the info you found. I am considering postgres for a couple of projects and if what you say is true I may have to use another DB.
He insists that to say more would enable Napster and other MP3 programs to block the software.
The proceadure/progarm/AI is defeatable by their own words. It will only take a little time and effort and NetPD will be made impotent!
Re:OK...anyone from Slashdot want to take this up?
on
Why Not MySQL?
·
· Score: 1
No mistake. It is a common misunderstanding. A DB engine must lock at the very least the record to be able to make sure that when it is being changed it isn't read at the same time and corrupt data is produced. MySQL locks on a per table basis. Sybase locks on a per "block" (can't remember the tech term) basis, I think PostgresSQL locks on a per record.
Any way the more granular the lock the more activity a table can have.
Re:OK...anyone from Slashdot want to take this up?
on
Why Not MySQL?
·
· Score: 1
If you change anything in a table it is locked by the DB engine. If you do anything like an update, insert, or delete you have locked the table blocking any other update insert or delete until it is complete.
Re:OK...anyone from Slashdot want to take this up?
on
Why Not MySQL?
·
· Score: 2
Read the article. Only one write to a table can be made at a time, i.e. table level locking. There are no stored proceadures and quite a few other things missing that actually improve performance. Yea for reading MySQL is faster but for a lot of writes to the the same table it will perform worse than some other DBs, PostgresSQL. I have a feeling that on very active stories that MySQL may be the reason for the slowdown, because there are to many people trying to post which yeilds too many writes which yeilds contention!
Designing an i/o device for a physically impaired person is a difficult task. I've been thinking about this for quit a while and to get any where you have to understand the ideas behind the current way of doing things.
A computer, for most of the desktops, has two primary input devices, the keyboard and the mouse.
The keyboard is a conglomeration of many one dimensional buttons. A button is either on or off.
The mouse is on a 2 dimensional plane with 1 to 3 one dimensional buttons.
This combination has been very effective for creating input for a computer. In fact it can be argued that a keyboard is more productive than a mouse due to the time/movement factor. I can, with a couple of key strokes, do X but to use the mouse I have to move my hand and move the mouse to get the same thing done in 10x the amount of time. So following that line of logic a 1 dimensional input device is more efficient than a 2 dimensional input device. For the sake of efficiency it would be best to use a device with many 1 dimensional inputs, buttons, for a disabled person.
The most successful input device for a physically impaired person, IMHO, is the 2 paddles that Stephen Hawking uses for communication. It is very slow and laborious but with a little patience he is able to get quite a bit done. From what I understand is that there are paddles, basically buttons, which provide 2 one dimensional inputs.
Taken that this is a 2 bit system and a keyboard is based on ASCII, an 8 bit system (7 of them useable) you have 128 combinations. A 2 bit system has 4 so 128/4 = 32. So to get the same amount of work done out of the paddles you need to spend 32 times the amount of time.
Now that all of that is understood, and probably poorly. A new form of input needs to be invented based on the specific needs of the specific person. You need to determine how many one dimensional planes can he interface with then design a system around that. If he has use of his feet they can be used in the interface also. In fact if enough 1 dimensional planes are identified and specifically tailored to his need he may be more productive on a computer than the better than average computer user.
I've worked with 2 GPS systems. Both were diferential GPS.
The first was for the Arieal Robotics Competition held in the summer of 1996 at Epcot Center Orlando Florida. I was with Oakland Unversity. We built a helecoptor that used diff. GPS with resolution of 1 cm, plus or minus 1 cm of acuracy, giving us within 3 cm of acuracy. We put an antenna in the nose and the tail. This gave us enough resoultion for bearing (I cannot remember if we went with this solution or if we used the honneywell compas, we were limited on the number of channels the transever had.) Anyway using the diferential GPS we had resolution of 3 cm.
The second project was for the automatic docking of ships. I did not have the exact specs. of the GPS but to be able to dock a ship you need more resolution than 10 meters.
I have no idea waht the resolution of the consumer GPS recevers will have. It basically depends on the number of Sats. the unit will use.
Ever heard of the Michigan Militia or any other militia organizations?
Most of the serious members are trained! I don't belong to any of them but I do know the leader of the Michigan Militia. He is a retired general of the US army. In fact I bought an AR-15 from him. Gee that M-16 ammo will work quit nicely in my AR-15 and gee all the ammo we got from the last raid also came with guns which we picked up. Boy all those retired military types who are part of the militias do know how to drive a tank they know how to fly the helicopter. Boy you now have the same knowledge as the US military but in very small groups who are very hard to hunt down because they are small and more mobile than the US army. Kinda like the Vietcong during the Vietnam war. Guerillas in the trees were how successful? How many American lives were lost? Now they were defeated because of the intense bombing raids. Would the US military bomb American soil effectively destroying their support?
A little forethought would have stopped you from your post. When you find 7.62mm ammo from a raid usually there is a matching gun that can be used with it. Again these are tactics of Guerilla Warfare!
c'mon, gun nuts - i'm serious. who out there really thinks that they and their hunting buddies could hold out against the U.S. Army for more than, say, 24 hours?
It is called Guerilla Warfare which is extremely effective. A small band of lightly armed men are extremely mobile. The heavily armed US army is extremely immobile. As you slowly pick off small parts of the US army you capture extremely valuable resources which reinforce your lethality. Making you stronger and them weaker.
I could go on and on. There are quite a few good books on Guerilla Warfare. The US government and every other government out there studies it and is very worried about it.
And by the way... If I wanted to I could buy military grade X on the black market, i.e. plastic explosives with remote and timed detonators, very effective in guerilla warfare. Which by the way "fell" off the back of a transport. I can buy an AR-15, which is the civilian version of the M-16, and use a common file to modify the firing pin to convert it to a fully automatic machine gun. IMO this is much more than "hunting buddies."
Also sorry about the 12 years typo it is 120 years.
Personally, I am not a huge fan of guns because they are becoming less and less practical in today's urban society.
What is the practical use of a gun? To kill. The original writers of the constitution specifically put in the right to keep and bear arms into the 2nd amendment of the constitution for 1 reason... To make it impossible for our government to do whatever they want to us. The original intent was that if the legislators started to do what the British government was doing then the citizens of the country could rise up and overthrow the repressive government. Yes you read that right the founding fathers encouraged the use of a violent overthrow if the American government became repressive. Thomas Jefferson in his biography stated that a violent overthrow of the government should happen every 12 years or so. Basically eliminating corruption.
To continue with "original intent" it was the intent of the original writers of the constitution that the citizens would have access to the same firepower as the government. Today that is impractical with the development of weapons of mass destruction, but there are many weapons that are impossible for a citizen of the United States to legally own which are not weapons of mass destruction.
If guns are taken from the citizens hands who is going to stop the government if it decides to repeat the past of the British. If you don't think the government is going to do this then explain why many of our freedoms been striped from us.
The United States may be needing another war of independence in which guns would be very practical. Of course this is just MHO.
The reason SPAM is rampant, at least on UU.NET, is that it is the largest supplier of residential, permanent internet connections, i.e. xDLS. So now you have many amateurs running computers full time on the internet. Now with the growth of linux and the naive nature of amateurs you have unprotected SMTP servers just sitting out there for the SPAMers to find! And for the fact that the spammers can get a Linux box pre configured with Sendmail, RedHat 5.x and 6.x, and spam from a dial-up connection from something like NetZero. You don't pay for the SPAM and you don't pay for the internet connection!
This, kinda, happened to me... I was a linux newbie. I installed RedHat Linux 5.1 on my PC. My PC was on a cable modem. Anybody with a little knowledge could have used my server for SPAM. Now I have a decent firewall protecting my server and ONLY the ports that I need are open. I use ssh instead of telnet...
Until security is implemented by the ISPs and tighter regulation on SPAM it will be something all us netzins will have to put up with.
A little off topic but while on the subject of SPAM here is a neat little trick for auto responders...
Reply to an auto responder with your reply-to address of that auto responder. If the person who set it up forgot to deny mail to its self you'll have one busy auto responder.
Or if the person who set up the auto responder was smart and set it up to not send mail to its self send an e-mail to the auto responder with the reply to address of another auto responder and watch them duke it out.
It was only a matter of time before women got on the net. So women are now on the net. It was only a matter of time.
And online, they make different choices than men. O.K. State the obvious. Lets take a look at kindergarten play time. They boys play dominance games. Which boy is the strongest or fastest. The girls play cooperative games where there is no winner like house. (Disclaimer... I know this is a generalization but for the most part it is true.)
Women networking on the net. John, don't you mean talking. HMMM.... My sister spends hours on the phone. Now she spends hours on the computer. The only thing different is the that she is typing her communication instead of verbalizing it. The same thing for my mother. What they think is neat is that they talk to more than one person at a time.
It was only a matter of time that women would discover the net for one of their favorite past time. Gossip!
There seems to be quite a few questions about the specifics and morality of AI but I have never seen a good definition.
From what I understand most people seem to think AI is the ability to solve problems or anticipate the actions on some type of input. For AI to truly be intelligent wouldn't it have to involve some kind of inspirational thought? Maybe a better way of saying this is, creativity.
Humans solve problems in an extremely abstract and creative way. Just look at babies for instance. They try different things over and over again. They don't stop until they get it right. No body taught that baby how to do it. Neither was that baby shown the different ways of trying something. It just sees what other people do then tries to replicate the action.
Based on this shouldn't the definition of AI include inspiration or creativity?
Re:seems like it's missing a few things
on
Jet3d Game Engine
·
· Score: 2
I have a feeling that they didn't port it to Linux in hopes that the Linux community would. The licnesing appears to be be extremely close to the GPL, based on this their thoughts are probably along the lines of...
"Lets releas a 3D graphics engine for the more popular gaming platform, Windbloz, open up the source and reep the benifits of the open community"
Oh, I wish more companies would adopt this mentality. I wouldn't mind doing the work my self!
If I read your FAQ correctly, FreeNet is based on a multi-layered cashing system (like cashing proxies on the internet today). For static content (i.e. graphic images, white papers, stories, mp3s, iso images...) this type of system would work great. On the other hand you have dynamic data (i.e. stock quotes, e-commerse, search engines, "today's top 10 list",...) How do you plan on handling dynamic content such as slashdot.org?
You bring up a valid point. The system can be abused.
Because the System can be abused why not abuse it in a constructive manner...
The system is going to be anonymous. This is the only way it will work, i.e. a wimp needs to turn in a bully because he likes to torture cats. If it is not anonymous the wimp will not turn in the bully for fear of getting the CRAP beaten out of him by the bully and his friends.
Because of this anonymous nature ANYBODY can use it, not just students.
If this system is implemented just turn in every student in a particular school. Why not get all the parents involved. Make convincing accusations and "way out there" accusations. The system will crumble in an instant, the equivalent of a DDoS attack. How would they be able to go over all the reports? How could they act on all of them, every student?
If this system is implemented I would be very tempted to organize and execute a DDoS of the W.A.V.E
I disagree. Probably the best way to censor the computer you have at home is to install monitoring software. This software would log everywhere the person went.
I know this is a privacy issue but it would be private citizens installing it on private computers for monitoring their children. It could also be a way of keeping enployees in check. Just display the logs of all the employees internet browsing, including the boss, in an easily accessable site. The system becomes self regulating.
I've had experience with this. To stop somone from going to porn sites all I told them was that I could get on the computer and see every where they went. They never did it again. It has worked supprisingly well. If they were to have done it I would find out then the internet would be unpluged. Fear of being cought held them in check.
You will notice that with the exception of a few Linux fanatics, most Microsoft customers are quite happy with their products.
I beg to differ! Every place that I have ever worked for, from GM to the mom & pop shop and every thing in between, they have hated, I mean HATED Microsoft.
- Windows NT, their "enterprise" flag ship has never, in my experience, made it past 1 month without a reboot.
- Windows 98 well 'nuff said!
- Microsoft Exchange is just horible. It is slow; needs too much power for just a few users; and crashes quite a bit.
- Microsoft Office crashes; Access is slow and buggy; is bloat ware; It slowy eats it's self and has to be re-installed about twice as much as Windows 9x
- Microsoft SQL server CRASHES; is slow; is quite buggy; is bloat ware; It has MANY memory leakes; is slow; is slow; is slow; has to be shut down and restarted about twice a week
- Microsoft Visual Studio 6.0; is bloat ware; is slow; is terribly buggy; crashes too much; crashes windows NT too much; every few debugging sessions has to be restarted; and sucks up too much resources.
- Microsoft IE; crashes more than any other application that I have ever worked with!
I can go on and on! Every one of Microsoft's products are really bad! I've never met anybody who was satisifed with Microsoft. The only reason corporations use it is that they already have too much money invested in it and it would look bad to use a different product. In other words politics. The support issue is no longer an issue. Linux support is 10x better and 100x faster than any Microsoft support issue that I have ever worked with.
Thank you SO much. You just saved me hours of work. I was compiling the code as I read your info. The work that I am doing is using Sys V IPC heavly. Thanks again!
By the way anybody using XFree86 4.0 should include your adition to the/etc/fstab. Because 4.0 uses SHM. Here is a printout of an ipcs call on my Linux box...
[rreich@orcana rreich]$ ipcs
------ Shared Memory Segments -------- key shmid owner perms bytes nattch status 0x00000000 98305 root 644 4096 5 dest 0x00000000 131074 root 644 4096 2 dest 0x00000000 1376259 root 644 4096 2 dest 0x00000000 1409028 root 644 4096 3 dest 0x00000000 1441797 root 644 4096 2 dest 0x00000000 5210118 root 644 4096 6 dest 0x00000000 5242887 root 644 4096 10 dest 0x00000000 5275656 root 644 4096 6 dest 0x00000000 18710537 root 644 4096 2 dest 0x00000000 18743306 root 644 4096 2 dest 0x00000000 18776075 root 644 4096 2 dest 0x00000000 18808844 root 644 4096 2 dest 0x00000000 18841613 root 644 4096 2 dest 0x00000000 19169294 root 644 4096 2 dest 0x00000000 19202063 root 644 4096 2 dest 0x00000000 19234832 root 644 4096 2 dest 0x00000000 19365905 root 644 4096 2 dest 0x00000000 19300370 root 644 4096 2 dest 0x00000000 19398675 root 644 4096 2 dest 0x00000000 19922964 root 644 4096 2 dest 0x00000000 19955733 root 644 4096 2 dest 0x00000000 20578326 root 644 4096 2 dest
------ Semaphore Arrays -------- key semid owner perms nsems status
Slashdot Mirror
I must say though that Microsoft seems a bit childish about it.
/. attracts are, for the most part, very technical and the same people Microsoft wants to assimilate. All this is doing is giving Microsoft a chance to try to bring down /.
/.
/. is a thorn is Microsoft's side. It is hurting there business because of the technically oriented content that is commonly posted here, to put it mildly, is severely negative towards them. Not only that it is extremely accurate. I wouldn't be suppressed if there were a couple of tech support calls that /. was brought up in....
/. would be to Microsofts great advantage. It would hurting the community to which Microsoft is competing. Right now they cannot fight a corporation they are fighting an ideal they have to do something to the comment or Linux and the *BSDs are going to flourish in the corporate world killing Microsoft in the process.
Yea my brother when he was 3 would throw a temper tantrum when he didn't get his way or was being bothered.
Microsoft is LOOSING they are going to go kicking and screaming all the way down! Linux and the *BSDs are eating into them. We haven't hit critical mass yet but in a year or two Microsoft is going to be hurting really really bad!
/. is a thorn in Microsoft's side. The users that
These documents are quite easy to find elsewhere. And I don't see how they would seriously be harmed by this. Though they are probably in their right to ask this.
They aren't going to be harmed at all. For all we know Microsoft put the article out there to entrap organizations like
Getting down to the point...
Here is a hypothetical situation...
Microsoft Tech support phone call...
Msft - what seems to be the problem
User - Umm its not working
Msft - what isn't working
User - Realplayer with Windows 95 OSR2
Msft - Umm that is the fault of Realplayer
User - Umm... I have very technical data pointing he finger to Microsoft. You can find it at slashdot.org. There is very specific data and quite a few comments from the experts about it.
Msft - Umm... Umm... Umm...
To take out
It is this set of victim machines which launches the final attack.
:)
I personally doubt that there is any defence against a propperly executed DDOS attack.
Stefan is not proposing a way to catch the perpetrator, but to locate the computers that are performing the DDoS attack.
As in the article simply put...
The basic idea behind the approach Stefan outlined is for each router that forwards a packet to mark it with information that will allow the recipient of the packet to trace it to it's source.
This is over simplified but in the article he explains a way to mark packets, in a kinda random way, in such a manner as to be able to trace the source and then taking the proper action. Temporarly shutting down the deliquent computer's internet connection.
This would not prevent the DDoS attack but it would speed up the process of shutting it down by removing the human factor in tracing the attacks.
Because there is no difference between a propper DDOS and "The SlashDot Effect."
Yes there is! A DDoS attack is a larg number of computers sending/requesting Massive amounts of information. The "Slashdot Effect" is Massive amounts of computers sending/requesiting moderate amounts of information. Except for large downloads then they are requesting Massive amounts of information, i.e. when netscape pre-6 was announced
I don't even know why I am responding to this. I guess it is because I waiting for a big download to finish.
Funny how you are quick to point out how it's unrealistic to expect programmers to understand every aspect of their code, but then seem to support the idea that before microsoft there was "stable" software. Software engineering sucks, inside and outside of Microsoft.
I do expect developers to understand every aspect of their code but not every aspect of others code! There is a difference.
There is also a DIFFERENCE between stable software and programmers understanding every aspect of the project they are working on.
I've worked on projects where not one of the developers, including the tech lead, understood every aspect of the code but it was incredibly stable!
Well my download is complete so I am going to stop wasting my time.
One of the "highlights" in the developer's page talked about how the new release version 6.5 represents Postgres' mastery over the source. What does that mean? According to the developers, it is the first release where they have someone on the team that understands every section of code.
Postgres is a huge project. In any huge or even just a big project you cannot expect every programmer to understand every aspect of the code.
That is why modularity is so important. You can have one person woking/understanding one component and another woking/understanding another component. They do not have to understand eachothers code just the interface to it!
That is why libraries are so popular. I only understand about 1% of the GTK+ code but I can use it quite well. I undrstand very little of the c runtime library code but I can use it quite well. I understand very little of the ptheread library code but I can use it quite well. If I had to fully understand a library's source code it would be better for me to just develop it my self rather than spending the time to understand every line of code and decifering the autor's coding style.
As to your other concerns I haven't found any evidence of it on the postgresql.org web site. If you can please post the links to the info you found. I am considering postgres for a couple of projects and if what you say is true I may have to use another DB.
You've hit on a really good point...
He insists that to say more would enable Napster and other MP3 programs to block the software.
The proceadure/progarm/AI is defeatable by their own words. It will only take a little time and effort and NetPD will be made impotent!
No mistake. It is a common misunderstanding. A DB engine must lock at the very least the record to be able to make sure that when it is being changed it isn't read at the same time and corrupt data is produced. MySQL locks on a per table basis. Sybase locks on a per "block" (can't remember the tech term) basis, I think PostgresSQL locks on a per record.
Any way the more granular the lock the more activity a table can have.
If you change anything in a table it is locked by the DB engine. If you do anything like an update, insert, or delete you have locked the table blocking any other update insert or delete until it is complete.
Read the article. Only one write to a table can be made at a time, i.e. table level locking. There are no stored proceadures and quite a few other things missing that actually improve performance. Yea for reading MySQL is faster but for a lot of writes to the the same table it will perform worse than some other DBs, PostgresSQL. I have a feeling that on very active stories that MySQL may be the reason for the slowdown, because there are to many people trying to post which yeilds too many writes which yeilds contention!
You had me laughing out loud. Thanks for the correction!
Designing an i/o device for a physically impaired person is a difficult task. I've been thinking about this for quit a while and to get any where you have to understand the ideas behind the current way of doing things.
A computer, for most of the desktops, has two primary input devices, the keyboard and the mouse.
The keyboard is a conglomeration of many one dimensional buttons. A button is either on or off.
The mouse is on a 2 dimensional plane with 1 to 3 one dimensional buttons.
This combination has been very effective for creating input for a computer. In fact it can be argued that a keyboard is more productive than a mouse due to the time/movement factor. I can, with a couple of key strokes, do X but to use the mouse I have to move my hand and move the mouse to get the same thing done in 10x the amount of time. So following that line of logic a 1 dimensional input device is more efficient than a 2 dimensional input device. For the sake of efficiency it would be best to use a device with many 1 dimensional inputs, buttons, for a disabled person.
The most successful input device for a physically impaired person, IMHO, is the 2 paddles that Stephen Hawking uses for communication. It is very slow and laborious but with a little patience he is able to get quite a bit done. From what I understand is that there are paddles, basically buttons, which provide 2 one dimensional inputs.
Taken that this is a 2 bit system and a keyboard is based on ASCII, an 8 bit system (7 of them useable) you have 128 combinations. A 2 bit system has 4 so 128/4 = 32. So to get the same amount of work done out of the paddles you need to spend 32 times the amount of time.
Now that all of that is understood, and probably poorly. A new form of input needs to be invented based on the specific needs of the specific person. You need to determine how many one dimensional planes can he interface with then design a system around that. If he has use of his feet they can be used in the interface also. In fact if enough 1 dimensional planes are identified and specifically tailored to his need he may be more productive on a computer than the better than average computer user.
I've worked with 2 GPS systems. Both were diferential GPS.
The first was for the Arieal Robotics Competition held in the summer of 1996 at Epcot Center Orlando Florida. I was with Oakland Unversity. We built a helecoptor that used diff. GPS with resolution of 1 cm, plus or minus 1 cm of acuracy, giving us within 3 cm of acuracy. We put an antenna in the nose and the tail. This gave us enough resoultion for bearing (I cannot remember if we went with this solution or if we used the honneywell compas, we were limited on the number of channels the transever had.) Anyway using the diferential GPS we had resolution of 3 cm.
The second project was for the automatic docking of ships. I did not have the exact specs. of the GPS but to be able to dock a ship you need more resolution than 10 meters.
I have no idea waht the resolution of the consumer GPS recevers will have. It basically depends on the number of Sats. the unit will use.
...maybe we could begin to have overclockable laptops.
Due to the variable clock-rate of the Curso chip and the new chipset needed to drive it. I highly doubt that over-clocking would be a possiblity.
But I could be wrong...
Ever heard of the Michigan Militia or any other militia organizations?
Most of the serious members are trained! I don't belong to any of them but I do know the leader of the Michigan Militia. He is a retired general of the US army. In fact I bought an AR-15 from him. Gee that M-16 ammo will work quit nicely in my AR-15 and gee all the ammo we got from the last raid also came with guns which we picked up. Boy all those retired military types who are part of the militias do know how to drive a tank they know how to fly the helicopter. Boy you now have the same knowledge as the US military but in very small groups who are very hard to hunt down because they are small and more mobile than the US army. Kinda like the Vietcong during the Vietnam war. Guerillas in the trees were how successful? How many American lives were lost? Now they were defeated because of the intense bombing raids. Would the US military bomb American soil effectively destroying their support?
A little forethought would have stopped you from your post. When you find 7.62mm ammo from a raid usually there is a matching gun that can be used with it. Again these are tactics of Guerilla Warfare!
c'mon, gun nuts - i'm serious. who out there really thinks that they and their hunting buddies could hold out against the U.S. Army for more than, say, 24 hours?
It is called Guerilla Warfare which is extremely effective. A small band of lightly armed men are extremely mobile. The heavily armed US army is extremely immobile. As you slowly pick off small parts of the US army you capture extremely valuable resources which reinforce your lethality. Making you stronger and them weaker.
I could go on and on. There are quite a few good books on Guerilla Warfare. The US government and every other government out there studies it and is very worried about it.
And by the way... If I wanted to I could buy military grade X on the black market, i.e. plastic explosives with remote and timed detonators, very effective in guerilla warfare. Which by the way "fell" off the back of a transport. I can buy an AR-15, which is the civilian version of the M-16, and use a common file to modify the firing pin to convert it to a fully automatic machine gun. IMO this is much more than "hunting buddies."
Also sorry about the 12 years typo it is 120 years.
Personally, I am not a huge fan of guns because they are becoming less and less practical in today's urban society.
What is the practical use of a gun? To kill. The original writers of the constitution specifically put in the right to keep and bear arms into the 2nd amendment of the constitution for 1 reason... To make it impossible for our government to do whatever they want to us. The original intent was that if the legislators started to do what the British government was doing then the citizens of the country could rise up and overthrow the repressive government. Yes you read that right the founding fathers encouraged the use of a violent overthrow if the American government became repressive. Thomas Jefferson in his biography stated that a violent overthrow of the government should happen every 12 years or so. Basically eliminating corruption.
To continue with "original intent" it was the intent of the original writers of the constitution that the citizens would have access to the same firepower as the government. Today that is impractical with the development of weapons of mass destruction, but there are many weapons that are impossible for a citizen of the United States to legally own which are not weapons of mass destruction.
If guns are taken from the citizens hands who is going to stop the government if it decides to repeat the past of the British. If you don't think the government is going to do this then explain why many of our freedoms been striped from us.
The United States may be needing another war of independence in which guns would be very practical. Of course this is just MHO.
The reason SPAM is rampant, at least on UU.NET, is that it is the largest supplier of residential, permanent internet connections, i.e. xDLS. So now you have many amateurs running computers full time on the internet. Now with the growth of linux and the naive nature of amateurs you have unprotected SMTP servers just sitting out there for the SPAMers to find! And for the fact that the spammers can get a Linux box pre configured with Sendmail, RedHat 5.x and 6.x, and spam from a dial-up connection from something like NetZero. You don't pay for the SPAM and you don't pay for the internet connection!
This, kinda, happened to me... I was a linux newbie. I installed RedHat Linux 5.1 on my PC. My PC was on a cable modem. Anybody with a little knowledge could have used my server for SPAM. Now I have a decent firewall protecting my server and ONLY the ports that I need are open. I use ssh instead of telnet...
Until security is implemented by the ISPs and tighter regulation on SPAM it will be something all us netzins will have to put up with.
A little off topic but while on the subject of SPAM here is a neat little trick for auto responders...
Reply to an auto responder with your reply-to address of that auto responder. If the person who set it up forgot to deny mail to its self you'll have one busy auto responder.
Or if the person who set up the auto responder was smart and set it up to not send mail to its self send an e-mail to the auto responder with the reply to address of another auto responder and watch them duke it out.
It was only a matter of time before women got on the net. So women are now on the net. It was only a matter of time.
And online, they make different choices than men.
O.K. State the obvious. Lets take a look at kindergarten play time. They boys play dominance games. Which boy is the strongest or fastest. The girls play cooperative games where there is no winner like house. (Disclaimer... I know this is a generalization but for the most part it is true.)
Women networking on the net. John, don't you mean talking. HMMM.... My sister spends hours on the phone. Now she spends hours on the computer. The only thing different is the that she is typing her communication instead of verbalizing it. The same thing for my mother. What they think is neat is that they talk to more than one person at a time.
It was only a matter of time that women would discover the net for one of their favorite past time. Gossip!
There seems to be quite a few questions about the specifics and morality of AI but I have never seen a good definition.
From what I understand most people seem to think AI is the ability to solve problems or anticipate the actions on some type of input. For AI to truly be intelligent wouldn't it have to involve some kind of inspirational thought? Maybe a better way of saying this is, creativity.
Humans solve problems in an extremely abstract and creative way. Just look at babies for instance. They try different things over and over again. They don't stop until they get it right. No body taught that baby how to do it. Neither was that baby shown the different ways of trying something. It just sees what other people do then tries to replicate the action.
Based on this shouldn't the definition of AI include inspiration or creativity?
I have a feeling that they didn't port it to Linux in hopes that the Linux community would. The licnesing appears to be be extremely close to the GPL, based on this their thoughts are probably along the lines of...
"Lets releas a 3D graphics engine for the more popular gaming platform, Windbloz, open up the source and reep the benifits of the open community"
Oh, I wish more companies would adopt this mentality. I wouldn't mind doing the work my self!
If I read your FAQ correctly, FreeNet is based on a multi-layered cashing system (like cashing proxies on the internet today). For static content (i.e. graphic images, white papers, stories, mp3s, iso images...) this type of system would work great. On the other hand you have dynamic data (i.e. stock quotes, e-commerse, search engines, "today's top 10 list", ...) How do you plan on handling dynamic content such as slashdot.org?
In case of the slashdot effect I've set up a mirror of the Linux 2.2 version. I have limited bandwith so I limited the active http connections to 15.
Enjoy!
You bring up a valid point. The system can be abused.
Because the System can be abused why not abuse it in a constructive manner...
The system is going to be anonymous. This is the only way it will work, i.e. a wimp needs to turn in a bully because he likes to torture cats. If it is not anonymous the wimp will not turn in the bully for fear of getting the CRAP beaten out of him by the bully and his friends.
Because of this anonymous nature ANYBODY can use it, not just students.
If this system is implemented just turn in every student in a particular school. Why not get all the parents involved. Make convincing accusations and "way out there" accusations. The system will crumble in an instant, the equivalent of a DDoS attack. How would they be able to go over all the reports? How could they act on all of them, every student?
If this system is implemented I would be very tempted to organize and execute a DDoS of the W.A.V.E
I disagree. Probably the best way to censor the computer you have at home is to install monitoring software. This software would log everywhere the person went.
I know this is a privacy issue but it would be private citizens installing it on private computers for monitoring their children. It could also be a way of keeping enployees in check. Just display the logs of all the employees internet browsing, including the boss, in an easily accessable site. The system becomes self regulating.
I've had experience with this. To stop somone from going to porn sites all I told them was that I could get on the computer and see every where they went. They never did it again. It has worked supprisingly well. If they were to have done it I would find out then the internet would be unpluged. Fear of being cought held them in check.
You will notice that with the exception of a few Linux fanatics, most Microsoft customers are quite happy with their products.
I beg to differ! Every place that I have ever worked for, from GM to the mom & pop shop and every thing in between, they have hated, I mean HATED Microsoft.
- Windows NT, their "enterprise" flag ship has never, in my experience, made it past 1 month without a reboot.
- Windows 98 well 'nuff said!
- Microsoft Exchange is just horible. It is slow; needs too much power for just a few users; and crashes quite a bit.
- Microsoft Office crashes; Access is slow and buggy; is bloat ware; It slowy eats it's self and has to be re-installed about twice as much as Windows 9x
- Microsoft SQL server CRASHES; is slow; is quite buggy; is bloat ware; It has MANY memory leakes; is slow; is slow; is slow; has to be shut down and restarted about twice a week
- Microsoft Visual Studio 6.0; is bloat ware; is slow; is terribly buggy; crashes too much; crashes windows NT too much; every few debugging sessions has to be restarted; and sucks up too much resources.
- Microsoft IE; crashes more than any other application that I have ever worked with!
I can go on and on! Every one of Microsoft's products are really bad! I've never met anybody who was satisifed with Microsoft. The only reason corporations use it is that they already have too much money invested in it and it would look bad to use a different product. In other words politics. The support issue is no longer an issue. Linux support is 10x better and 100x faster than any Microsoft support issue that I have ever worked with.
Thank you SO much. You just saved me hours of work. I was compiling the code as I read your info. The work that I am doing is using Sys V IPC heavly. Thanks again!
/etc/fstab. Because 4.0 uses SHM. Here is a printout of an ipcs call on my Linux box...
By the way anybody using XFree86 4.0 should include your adition to the
[rreich@orcana rreich]$ ipcs
------ Shared Memory Segments --------
key shmid owner perms bytes nattch status
0x00000000 98305 root 644 4096 5 dest
0x00000000 131074 root 644 4096 2 dest
0x00000000 1376259 root 644 4096 2 dest
0x00000000 1409028 root 644 4096 3 dest
0x00000000 1441797 root 644 4096 2 dest
0x00000000 5210118 root 644 4096 6 dest
0x00000000 5242887 root 644 4096 10 dest
0x00000000 5275656 root 644 4096 6 dest
0x00000000 18710537 root 644 4096 2 dest
0x00000000 18743306 root 644 4096 2 dest
0x00000000 18776075 root 644 4096 2 dest
0x00000000 18808844 root 644 4096 2 dest
0x00000000 18841613 root 644 4096 2 dest
0x00000000 19169294 root 644 4096 2 dest
0x00000000 19202063 root 644 4096 2 dest
0x00000000 19234832 root 644 4096 2 dest
0x00000000 19365905 root 644 4096 2 dest
0x00000000 19300370 root 644 4096 2 dest
0x00000000 19398675 root 644 4096 2 dest
0x00000000 19922964 root 644 4096 2 dest
0x00000000 19955733 root 644 4096 2 dest
0x00000000 20578326 root 644 4096 2 dest
------ Semaphore Arrays --------
key semid owner perms nsems status
------ Message Queues --------
key msqid owner perms used-bytes messages
... all of the SHM entries are for XFree86 4.0. They don't show up if you don't include the stuff in the fstab.