So I used to work for a broadband wireless equipment manufacturer, and it seems that the "average internet user" has come a bit of a ways in their understanding.
Fact is, most internet users have streamed crappy video at one time or another, and are therefore de facto aware of how video on the internet is "hard to do". So when you show them full screen "TV quality" video on a computer the standard response has changed from "So what, my TV can do that" to "Wow! That's as good as my TV!".
Couple that with "and it's wireless" and people start frothing at the mouth;)
Because there's something comforting about that "Oh, there's the hero (we'll call him Luke), there's the bad guy (we'll call him darth), and there's the nifty space battle where the lone ship (some kind of X-wing) destroys the big bad Star O' Death against all odds" story.
I generally like my stories and characters to have a little more depth, but every once in a while it's fun to read a little mindless "trash".
I never finished the Honour Harrington series because it got old real fast, but the first two books were fun.
Filthmaster writes "I just saw an interesting paper that has been posted to bugtraq, full-disclosure and vulnwatch. It deals with the principles of stealthily using network infrastructure as either short-term or long-term storage. Not sure if I'm ready to implement it, but it makes interesting food for thought."
With the network getting more intelligent, high-quality end-to-end connections become a possibility. Workable consumer and business broadband services could result, although the capacity constraint remains. Such services would not require a universal operating system and associated software understandable by all the end-users, rather it would be more efficient to design the link-up and download software independently for each application.
I love it when people don't do their research. This guy has just thrown the whole idea of a protocol stack out the window, and with it the whole spirit of a content agnostic/packet switched network.
To get the real message here, we have to replace every instance of the term "intelligent network" with "telephony network". So we see that what the businesses really want, is a high bandwidth telephony network.
He even mentions the fact that changing the network paradigm doesn't defeat the real problem:
With the network getting more intelligent [telephony like], high-quality end-to-end connections become a possibility. Workable consumer and business broadband services could result, although the capacity constraint remains.
What these people want, is a high bandwidth, application aware telephony network, for which consumers must not only pay connection/duration fees, but for which consumers must also buy many pieces of application specific hardware.
So as usual, instead of more education, we get more profits..
OK, so the CN Tower is 1815 feet high. It's the tallest man made thing in the world. Does anyone know why it's been disqualified as the tallest building in the world?
Also, whats this dogma about math being so essential to computer programming??? Take for example apache, slashdot, navigator and linux. How much math is in there? And if there is, how much is not wrapped in a nice library? C'com people, isnt it obvious, programming isnt about math or calculations, its about good writing. You have to be good at explaining to BOTH the compilier/interpreter AND other programmers what your program should do.
You don't seem to know very much about computers. How much math is there in there?! Are you kidding me? It's ALL math. And we're not talking about floating point 2.3e5/1.88e2 stuff here. Most of the meat of the code (the important stuff like sorting algorithms, scheduling, interthread communications, etc...) comes from theory of computation, which is math. Without the computer scientists and engineers working away on this stuff, we wouldn't even have multitasking operating systems.
Also, your point about talking to the compiler/interpreter hits the nail on the head. If you don't know how the compiler works, how can you be sure your program is doing what you think it's doing? And BTW, without all that math, we'd still be writing assembly language.
Wrong. In fact I work at a firm with a self made CE. He spent one semester at U of Waterloo, examined what he'd be learning for the next 4 years and realized he knew it all already.
I know this because I happen to have a CE degree myself and I havn't yet found a subject that he doesn't know more about than I do.
In fact, I'm convinced it's the four years of experience that he gained while I was at U of T that gives him a leg up:)
Woohoo and amen to that! Just a little rider though; the CS and CE courses can also differ a LOT. Just depends on your focus in CE (hardware vs software)
Re:A moment of silence. . .
on
The Challenger
·
· Score: 1
You may continue to do so, if it pleases you, and i may continue to refrain from it, and we may BOTH continue to tell each other which is right. Isn't that what they all fought for?
Yes, they did fight for those freedoms. But I prefer to exersise mine in other ways than belittling and dismissing the traditions of people different than myself. Veiled insults "all your life you will do nothing but sit in silence" and self important egotism (almost your own words:) seem a poor way to "make your life a tribute to those people".
But, I think I understand your problem with the tradition. Sitting for two minutes with a blank mind does nothing for those who've passed and even less for those who've yet to come. But what you should know is that when I was still in school, the moment of silence came after a morning of poetry by those caught in war, and was followed by an afternoon of history, much of which was delivered from the mouths of those who had experienced it for themselves.
So now during my hectic day, when I take my moment of silence, I use it to remember why I'm free to enjoy my life as much as I do, and to think of what I'll tell my children in order that they too remember why they're free.
Anyway, I think my point is that we all remember in our own way, and ANY WAY IS RIGHT, as long as we remember.
Re:A moment of silence. . .
on
The Challenger
·
· Score: 1
It may have been founded for Armistice day, but as far as my family, friends, and schoolmates have been concerned for the past twenty years I've been observing it with them, it shows respect for all those who fought and died for freedom in any war. But whatever, I didn't know I wasn't allowed to show my respect for more than one group on that day.
Re:A moment of silence. . .
on
The Challenger
·
· Score: 1
Wow, what a self absorbed jerk you must be. When I and my friends stand in silence on Nov 11 11:00 am for a moment of silence to remember those (including both my grandfathers) who fought (on opposing sides) during WWII it is neither trite nor politically correct and I'm offended at your casual dismissal of what is a very important tradition of respect for my entire family including the my one remaining grandfather.
If Microsoft refuses to sell me a copy of Windows or Honda refuses to sell me a car unless I sign some onerous agreement, I still have the ability to refuse.
Yup, I'm with you so far...
Exercising this ability may be harmful to me -- perhaps I work at a Windows-based company and will be fired if I don't agree to a MS license -- but I'm still given free choice.
Here's where we part ways. As far as I'm concerned I'll be fired if I don't agree is no longer free choice, this is a choice made under duress. You've already stated that threat of force is the government's means of enforcement, and I think you'll agree that decisions under threat of force (ie. give me money or I'll kill you) are not free choices. However, to me the threat of removal of financial support is different in degree only. Lets say all the companies in the area with positions available for me to fill use windows. For me, the choice then becomes: Accept the agreement, or lose my job, the house where my kids live, the car that my wife drives the kids to school in, etc. What kind of a choice is that? Being locked up is not the only harmful form of censure out there.
You're sacrificing individual freedoms in return for "whatever the masses want".
Not so! Not so! The protection of individual rights is exactly what I'm pushing here. Corporations must abide by the laws layed down by the government. The government must abide by the laws layed down by the people (the constitution). It is the government's primary job to make sure nothing interferes with the rights and freedoms expressed in that constitution. If the people feel that those rights and freedoms are being infringed upon, then the government is duty bound to do something about it, meaning they should investigate.
Remember, a corporation is composed of people, like you and me. When you restrict the corporation's actions, you restrict the actions of those individuals -- not just some faceless 'corporation'.
I agree! Corporations are not faceless, they have character based on the people that own and run them. Like any group of people, they are capable of good and bad judgement calls, and when that judgement call is bad (ie Infringes on rights and freedoms) the government has to put the smackdown.
What right does the government have to infringe on the rights of private corporations?
Every right! The government exists for the people, and if the majority of people don't like what the minority who control corporations are doing, then they have the responsibility and duty to restrict the activities of those corporations.
Anyway, the problem here is that your definition of freedom is a bit skewed. A free market system does not equal freedom as you seem to suggest. The rights and freedoms set down in the constitution were not written for corporations, they were written for human beings, and what's good for individual humans isn't always good for corporations. When government and big business get too cosy with each other, then the corporations begin to have undue control over the law. Don't get me wrong, I want my company to make me rich just as much as the next guy, but I for one still favour the basic rights of my fellow humans over the right to make a profit.
If tomorrow we woke up and books were gone, replaced by the Internet, you can be sure that it would be regulated pretty damn fast.
As more people use it, more people will want a say in what is on it.
You seem to be confusing the medium with the content here. All the same basic rules already apply to web content as to hardcopy, starting with: "You can't say it's yours if someone else wrote it." I (and most other's on the web) don't dispute such old and well established laws as pertain to the written word.
In fact, I agree with most of your post. The rights of individuals do need to be protected, and regulation is often the only way in such a large system.
But you show me where it says I have a say in what someone else puts in his or her books. In fact, the idea expressed in the above quote directly opposes one of the oldest and most cherished principals. Regulating internet content is akin to limiting what content is publishable in a newspaper, and no one that I know would stand for that.
I'm not sure I agree with this. First of all, I don't really think you can call Anime a medium. Animation is a medium, Anime is more of a style, or category.
I think you're right in saying that it's not a genre though, because you can have Anime that deals with fantasy, or sci-fi, or any other traditional genre for that matter.
I'll just call it a style of animation and leave it at that:)
I was just thinking about implementing something like this myself. Instead of using a partially correct system, where the user can just keep trying until the filter lets some porn through, we have a system where the user won't even try, because there's a chance they'll draw attention to themselves!:)
Re:Diversion from the main task/ counterproductive
on
Terminus Demo Released
·
· Score: 1
Your assertion that promoting gaming projects may in some way be damaging to Linux is just a little silly. Firstly, any project, and I do mean ANY project targeted at the GNU Linux platform simply widens the userbase and assists in locating areas where the operating system needs work. Secondly, gaming is a multi-billion dollar industry, and if every other app project were to fold tomorrow, linux could still find a financially comfortable niche as a gaming platform. Finally, by suggesting that post-columbine hysteria may have some sort of bearing on the future of Linux is ludicrous and only feeds more fuel to the ignorant, sustaining their obnoxious rhetoric.
I believe the Fortran compiler was the first fully functional (non prototypical) optimizing compiler. It's not really the language we're interested in anyway because most compilers look the same once you get past the token recognition stage. It's the fact that the Fortran compiler was the first to implement modern compiler theory that makes it special.
OK, I've read the series, seen the television show, heard the BBC radio show, and have heard rumour that there will be another made for TV movie or mini series or whatever.
That will bring the series incarnation count to a total of four. Now I've read the forward that explains that "the BBC productions and the book are NOT the same" and for good reason. But my question is, how do you keep track of that crazy universe? When it comes time to do another adaptation, which elements are necessary in any adaptation, and why?
Slashdot Mirror
the only entity that really survives is you.
Do dating services have constitutional rights?
YES
Like it says in the subject. Good test to make sure the backhaul is working :)
So I used to work for a broadband wireless equipment manufacturer, and it seems that the "average internet user" has come a bit of a ways in their understanding.
;)
Fact is, most internet users have streamed crappy video at one time or another, and are therefore de facto aware of how video on the internet is "hard to do". So when you show them full screen "TV quality" video on a computer the standard response has changed from "So what, my TV can do that" to "Wow! That's as good as my TV!".
Couple that with "and it's wireless" and people start frothing at the mouth
Because there's something comforting about that "Oh, there's the hero (we'll call him Luke), there's the bad guy (we'll call him darth), and there's the nifty space battle where the lone ship (some kind of X-wing) destroys the big bad Star O' Death against all odds" story.
I generally like my stories and characters to have a little more depth, but every once in a while it's fun to read a little mindless "trash".
I never finished the Honour Harrington series because it got old real fast, but the first two books were fun.
There's also a mirror up.
Sneaky bastards!
I love it when people don't do their research. This guy has just thrown the whole idea of a protocol stack out the window, and with it the whole spirit of a content agnostic/packet switched network.
To get the real message here, we have to replace every instance of the term "intelligent network" with "telephony network". So we see that what the businesses really want, is a high bandwidth telephony network.
He even mentions the fact that changing the network paradigm doesn't defeat the real problem:
With the network getting more intelligent [telephony like], high-quality end-to-end connections become a possibility. Workable consumer and business broadband services could result, although the capacity constraint remains.
What these people want, is a high bandwidth, application aware telephony network, for which consumers must not only pay connection/duration fees, but for which consumers must also buy many pieces of application specific hardware.
So as usual, instead of more education, we get more profits..
OK, so the CN Tower is 1815 feet high. It's the tallest man made thing in the world. Does anyone know why it's been disqualified as the tallest building in the world?
You don't seem to know very much about computers. How much math is there in there?! Are you kidding me? It's ALL math. And we're not talking about floating point 2.3e5/1.88e2 stuff here. Most of the meat of the code (the important stuff like sorting algorithms, scheduling, interthread communications, etc...) comes from theory of computation, which is math. Without the computer scientists and engineers working away on this stuff, we wouldn't even have multitasking operating systems.
Also, your point about talking to the compiler/interpreter hits the nail on the head. If you don't know how the compiler works, how can you be sure your program is doing what you think it's doing? And BTW, without all that math, we'd still be writing assembly language.
I know this because I happen to have a CE degree myself and I havn't yet found a subject that he doesn't know more about than I do.
In fact, I'm convinced it's the four years of experience that he gained while I was at U of T that gives him a leg up
Woohoo and amen to that! Just a little rider though; the CS and CE courses can also differ a LOT. Just depends on your focus in CE (hardware vs software)
Yes, they did fight for those freedoms. But I prefer to exersise mine in other ways than belittling and dismissing the traditions of people different than myself. Veiled insults "all your life you will do nothing but sit in silence" and self important egotism (almost your own words :) seem a poor way to "make your life a tribute to those people".
But, I think I understand your problem with the tradition. Sitting for two minutes with a blank mind does nothing for those who've passed and even less for those who've yet to come. But what you should know is that when I was still in school, the moment of silence came after a morning of poetry by those caught in war, and was followed by an afternoon of history, much of which was delivered from the mouths of those who had experienced it for themselves.
So now during my hectic day, when I take my moment of silence, I use it to remember why I'm free to enjoy my life as much as I do, and to think of what I'll tell my children in order that they too remember why they're free.
Anyway, I think my point is that we all remember in our own way, and ANY WAY IS RIGHT, as long as we remember.
It may have been founded for Armistice day, but as far as my family, friends, and schoolmates have been concerned for the past twenty years I've been observing it with them, it shows respect for all those who fought and died for freedom in any war. But whatever, I didn't know I wasn't allowed to show my respect for more than one group on that day.
Wow, what a self absorbed jerk you must be. When I and my friends stand in silence on Nov 11 11:00 am for a moment of silence to remember those (including both my grandfathers) who fought (on opposing sides) during WWII it is neither trite nor politically correct and I'm offended at your casual dismissal of what is a very important tradition of respect for my entire family including the my one remaining grandfather.
Yup, I'm with you so far...
Exercising this ability may be harmful to me -- perhaps I work at a Windows-based company and will be fired if I don't agree to a MS license -- but I'm still given free choice.
Here's where we part ways. As far as I'm concerned I'll be fired if I don't agree is no longer free choice, this is a choice made under duress. You've already stated that threat of force is the government's means of enforcement, and I think you'll agree that decisions under threat of force (ie. give me money or I'll kill you) are not free choices. However, to me the threat of removal of financial support is different in degree only. Lets say all the companies in the area with positions available for me to fill use windows. For me, the choice then becomes: Accept the agreement, or lose my job, the house where my kids live, the car that my wife drives the kids to school in, etc. What kind of a choice is that? Being locked up is not the only harmful form of censure out there.
Not so! Not so! The protection of individual rights is exactly what I'm pushing here. Corporations must abide by the laws layed down by the government. The government must abide by the laws layed down by the people (the constitution). It is the government's primary job to make sure nothing interferes with the rights and freedoms expressed in that constitution. If the people feel that those rights and freedoms are being infringed upon, then the government is duty bound to do something about it, meaning they should investigate.
Remember, a corporation is composed of people, like you and me. When you restrict the corporation's actions, you restrict the actions of those individuals -- not just some faceless 'corporation'.
I agree! Corporations are not faceless, they have character based on the people that own and run them. Like any group of people, they are capable of good and bad judgement calls, and when that judgement call is bad (ie Infringes on rights and freedoms) the government has to put the smackdown.
;)
That's just my 20 Lire
Every right! The government exists for the people, and if the majority of people don't like what the minority who control corporations are doing, then they have the responsibility and duty to restrict the activities of those corporations.
Anyway, the problem here is that your definition of freedom is a bit skewed. A free market system does not equal freedom as you seem to suggest. The rights and freedoms set down in the constitution were not written for corporations, they were written for human beings, and what's good for individual humans isn't always good for corporations. When government and big business get too cosy with each other, then the corporations begin to have undue control over the law. Don't get me wrong, I want my company to make me rich just as much as the next guy, but I for one still favour the basic rights of my fellow humans over the right to make a profit.
As more people use it, more people will want a say in what is on it.
You seem to be confusing the medium with the content here. All the same basic rules already apply to web content as to hardcopy, starting with: "You can't say it's yours if someone else wrote it." I (and most other's on the web) don't dispute such old and well established laws as pertain to the written word.
In fact, I agree with most of your post. The rights of individuals do need to be protected, and regulation is often the only way in such a large system. But you show me where it says I have a say in what someone else puts in his or her books. In fact, the idea expressed in the above quote directly opposes one of the oldest and most cherished principals. Regulating internet content is akin to limiting what content is publishable in a newspaper, and no one that I know would stand for that.
My good man, I couldn't have said it better myself!
I think you're right in saying that it's not a genre though, because you can have Anime that deals with fantasy, or sci-fi, or any other traditional genre for that matter.
I'll just call it a style of animation and leave it at that :)
I was just thinking about implementing something like this myself. Instead of using a partially correct system, where the user can just keep trying until the filter lets some porn through, we have a system where the user won't even try, because there's a chance they'll draw attention to themselves! :)
Your assertion that promoting gaming projects may in some way be damaging to Linux is just a little silly.
Firstly, any project, and I do mean ANY project targeted at the GNU Linux platform simply widens the userbase and assists in locating areas where the operating system needs work.
Secondly, gaming is a multi-billion dollar industry, and if every other app project were to fold tomorrow, linux could still find a financially comfortable niche as a gaming platform.
Finally, by suggesting that post-columbine hysteria may have some sort of bearing on the future of Linux is ludicrous and only feeds more fuel to the ignorant, sustaining their obnoxious rhetoric.
I believe the Fortran compiler was the first fully functional (non prototypical) optimizing compiler. It's not really the language we're interested in anyway because most compilers look the same once you get past the token recognition stage. It's the fact that the Fortran compiler was the first to implement modern compiler theory that makes it special.
That will bring the series incarnation count to a total of four. Now I've read the forward that explains that "the BBC productions and the book are NOT the same" and for good reason. But my question is, how do you keep track of that crazy universe? When it comes time to do another adaptation, which elements are necessary in any adaptation, and why?
Thanks, very long time fan :)