I'm seeing a lot of comments to the effect of drives not being all that slow. Let me provide an example to demonstrate just how slow they are.
Let's say you have a large forklift which is capable of carrying a few hundred boxes of paper from your archives. You're the forklift operator, and I'm the CPU.
Ok forklift, go get me box of paper #421769, which is in our on-site storage facility downstairs.
You drive off, and are back about two minutes later with the paper. That's the speed of memory.
Now, forklift, I'd like box of paper #090210, which is in our long-term storage facility.
You drive off. I go home. I have dinner, come back the next day, do stuff, go home... go on vacation for a while... probably get a new job... new car...
FOUR YEARS later, you come back. That's the speed of hard disk.
No matter how big that forklift (bus bandwidth) is, the latency difference between two minutes and four years is a pretty huge one.
[[[but if lightning strikes both of our homes, which of us is more likely to lose his entire music collection?]]]
Well, actually, you will. If lightning were to strike your house, there's a good chance it'd catch fire and you'd not have your 18 crates of low-melting-point vinyl out of there before the local fire department pulled you out kicking and screaming.
On the other hand, my music collection fits on two DLTs, and are backed up weekly. A copy of that backup is sent offsite (to a friend's house in a different state) every two weeks. If lightning or tornado or anything else strikes, I might lose one or two albums ripped in the last week or so, but that's it.
I wonder how many people, "on their own time", have used the CIA's massive computing resources to crack the code, and then having read the decoded text, have decided not to reveal what it says?
I mean -- with those kinds of resources, would you really be able to resist finding out what it says?
Perhaps the undecoded part says "Congratulations, now don't tell.:) "
I find it really amusing that they've got a shopping cart system on the web site. Seriously, how many companies are going to place an order for something that's almost a half million US$ sight-unseen on some web site?
Ok, I see your point. For instance, I could take those bits and, instead of running them through a CD player, run them through some other translator (say, some visual-effects generator). Whereas with this thing, they're controlling the process by which the bits are read, too.
Not only is it totally proprietary, but I no longer "own" it, like I do a CD. It's now almost like a "licensed copy" of the data.
When you buy a CD, you are licensing a copy of the music for your own personal use. You don't own it. You own the physical medium itself, yes, but not the data on it.
Yesterday, everyone was clamoring that Mozilla shouldn't incorporate the messaging software. Today, since they've been asked to remove it, suddenly everyone takes the other side?
I understand that it's a case of "if they can do this, what next?" -- and I don't disagree with the sentiment -- but it's still amusing
Historically, Linux has largely appeared as server software, but OpenLinux 2.2 is an attempt to reach an increasingly large group of people who want to try out the relatively new operating system.
Relatively new compared to what? I'd bet that the vast majority of reporters (including the one who wrote the article) believe that Windows 95 predates Linux.
The idea here is that the people signing the letter are people who, by and large, believe in the same things that most of us in the 'open source community' do.
If you disagree, by all means, make it known. If you don't disagree, then you are being represented fairly!
On matters of software politics, I for one am quite content to have my voice represented by the likes of esr & larry.
On the other hand, someone who can sift through the kernel finding bugs most likely got her skills by being a good (his definition) hacker. Script kiddies don't all of a sudden, magically, learn the esoteria of kernel programming.
And those write-ups do fill a very important part of the open-source community needs.
I guess it depends on how the person is breaking security. If you're boring your own hole, or painstakingly mapping the cracks in the wall -- I'd say you're dedicated and talented enough, in a lot of cases, to be called a hacker -- if you don't cause any damage, and if you then turn around and disemminate the information so it may be fixed. (Points if you write the patch yourself.)
On the other hand, if you're just taking advantage of the time between discovery and patch, and not actually doing any work yourself? Go home to mommy.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm seeing a lot of comments to the effect of drives not being all that slow. Let me provide an example to demonstrate just how slow they are.
... go on vacation for a while... probably get a new job... new car...
Let's say you have a large forklift which is capable of carrying a few hundred boxes of paper from your archives. You're the forklift operator, and I'm the CPU.
Ok forklift, go get me box of paper #421769, which is in our on-site storage facility downstairs.
You drive off, and are back about two minutes later with the paper. That's the speed of memory.
Now, forklift, I'd like box of paper #090210, which is in our long-term storage facility.
You drive off. I go home. I have dinner, come back the next day, do stuff, go home
FOUR YEARS later, you come back. That's the speed of hard disk.
No matter how big that forklift (bus bandwidth) is, the latency difference between two minutes and four years is a pretty huge one.
--
Nobody's mentioned that you don't see the ad unless you reboot.
This means even *more* incentive to write buggy code...
--
[[[but if lightning strikes both of our homes, which of us is more likely to lose his entire music collection?]]]
Well, actually, you will. If lightning were to strike your house, there's a good chance it'd catch fire and you'd not have your 18 crates of low-melting-point vinyl out of there before the local fire department pulled you out kicking and screaming.
On the other hand, my music collection fits on two DLTs, and are backed up weekly. A copy of that backup is sent offsite (to a friend's house in a different state) every two weeks. If lightning or tornado or anything else strikes, I might lose one or two albums ripped in the last week or so, but that's it.
--
Remember, they're measuring success by number of downloads. The more people mirror it, the less downloads they see...
--
I wonder how many people, "on their own time", have used the CIA's massive computing resources to crack the code, and then having read the decoded text, have decided not to reveal what it says?
:) "
I mean -- with those kinds of resources, would you really be able to resist finding out what it says?
Perhaps the undecoded part says "Congratulations, now don't tell.
--
After generating entropy and entering my passphrase, I get:
"I'm sorry, there has been an error. Please try again later."
--
Silly Everything Birthday Thingy.
--
You probably skimmed the wrong article, too.
--
I suppose we'll see more behind-the-scenes stuff once the movie is actually out. I found that the most interesting part of this.
--
I find it really amusing that they've got a shopping cart system on the web site. Seriously, how many companies are going to place an order for something that's almost a half million US$ sight-unseen on some web site?
--
Ok, I see your point. For instance, I could take those bits and, instead of running them through a CD player, run them through some other translator (say, some visual-effects generator). Whereas with this thing, they're controlling the process by which the bits are read, too.
--
When you buy a CD, you are licensing a copy of the music for your own personal use. You don't own it. You own the physical medium itself, yes, but not the data on it.
--
Yesterday, everyone was clamoring that Mozilla shouldn't incorporate the messaging software. Today, since they've been asked to remove it, suddenly everyone takes the other side?
I understand that it's a case of "if they can do this, what next?" -- and I don't disagree with the sentiment -- but it's still amusing
--
A question -- have Gates and Torvalds ever been on the same stage together?
--
Relatively new compared to what? I'd bet that the vast majority of reporters (including the one who wrote the article) believe that Windows 95 predates Linux.
--
Apparently, my theory is true:
slashdot readers have a significantly lower ability to recognize sarcasm than the average population.
--
Perhaps someone should remind rms that GNU is supposedly a recursive acronym for GNU's Not Unix.
Does he want to change it to GIL, GIL Is Linux?
--
The idea here is that the people signing the letter are people who, by and large, believe in the same things that most of us in the 'open source community' do.
If you disagree, by all means, make it known. If you don't disagree, then you are being represented fairly!
On matters of software politics, I for one am quite content to have my voice represented by the likes of esr & larry.
--
--
Not to nitpick, but shouldn't this be the funny-foot icon?
--
And those write-ups do fill a very important part of the open-source community needs.
I guess it depends on how the person is breaking security. If you're boring your own hole, or painstakingly mapping the cracks in the wall -- I'd say you're dedicated and talented enough, in a lot of cases, to be called a hacker -- if you don't cause any damage, and if you then turn around and disemminate the information so it may be fixed. (Points if you write the patch yourself.)
On the other hand, if you're just taking advantage of the time between discovery and patch, and not actually doing any work yourself? Go home to mommy.
--
Well... being esr, I think he's within his rights to claim the spotlight a bit. :)
--
It never ceases to amaze me that people can't even spell "/." correctly.
--
Can anyone point me to this software? I can't seem to find it.
dmd@3e.org
--
The challenge specifically refers to SQL Server 7.
--