Hrm, I wonder how well SCTP would fare under a Naptha (http://www.cert.org/advisories/CA-2000-21.html) type attack. Perhaps I should test it and find out. A good way to kill an afternoon...
This is true, to an extent. Humans can live outside of the 'standard day', as can other forms of life. There is a limit to what is healthy, however, and I know some people who have lived in northern Sweden during the winter, who will testify to the depression it can cause. I am aware that the first humans at Venus could be exposed to artificial sunlight and have shades drawn for their sleeping time in an effort to minimize this damage. Since the planetary shading is required, anyhow, in order to the atmosphere to change to something suitable for humans, it only makes sense to make the small extra effort to create an earth-like day/night cycle.
The great thing about what I am proposing is that the technology is within our grasp, as is shown by this article on solar sails. We still have much to accomplish before it becomes practical, however, but I am confidant that within two hundred years we will have started such a project.
There's a lot of talk about Mars exploration and possible terraforming, but there's much to support the idea that Venus may be easier to terraform. Two problems with Venus can be solved with the application of solar-sail technology:
1. providing some shade. Venus is obviously a lot closer to the sun, but it's not so close that we can't provide adequate 'sunglasses'.
2. providing day and night. Venus rotates very slowly - its day is about a year long! This causes lots of problems. First, it causes big heat differentials between one side of the planet and the other. The day side will be hot and the night side will be cold, and there would probably be big winds because of this. Also, plants and animals from earth require day/night cycles to survive and be healthy.
One of the problems with providing shade is that the very useful effect of the solar wind will push the shades beyond venus or into it. This can be countered by having the shades orbit venus, and tack against the solar wind, turning their sailing surface at different angles in relation to their intertia to maintain the desired orbit. There would be a rather thick and tall ring of sails some distance out from venus, coordinating to reflect light in a manner which would lighten some areas of the planet while darkening others - mimicing the daycycle of terra. A fine-grained control over this lighting could be used to provide optimum lighting for a specific area growing a specific crop, or concentrated beam could be focused on the collector at a solar power station.
This being slashdot, I am sure someone will think they're really clever by pointing that this same system could be used as a weapon, like a magnifying glass upon ants, at any target on the planet's surface. But be imaginative! The target would not be confined towards being on Venus, earth could be attacked too!
Warlike purposes aside, such a vast mirror system could also beam power to other parts of the solar system, or provide signalling across the vast reaches of space.
The problem is not only in the design of the sails, but in a factory to economically product the billions or trillions of them which will be required, and a system for placing them. Another system for co-ordination and maintenance will also be required. But all of these are conceivably do-able.
Please excuse spelling, grammar, and other assorted errors, as it's late and I am tired. If I had an job terraforming venus, you can be sure I'd be a lot more careful in preparing my proposals.
Yes, which is why agreeing to a compromise by meeting a wrong person halfway is a way to guarantee that both you and he are wrong. Hey, unity! brotherhood!
it takes grit out of suspension and oxygenates the water, sewage has the effect of deoxygenating the water which kills the fish. Oxygen levels are monitored and provided there is enough oxygen then the water from the sewage works can go into the river with the oxygenating of the water the fish swim around quite happily and everyone thinks the water is now clean.
Well, yes, that sounds pretty much like some of the wastewater treatment I have seen. Except that the oxygen in the water doesn't make it 'clean'. The reason why there's not enough oxygen in the water is because of the algae feeding on the nitrogen-rich (due to sewage) water, and they require oxygen. So, the water still has a lot of algae in it after this process, but that's okay for putting into rivers, because, well, that's part of the natural process. But it's still not 'clean' enough for drinking.
On a side note, cold water holds oxygen much better than warm water. Therefore, there is much more algae in cold ocean water than warm, which is why up here in New England the sea looks a dark green, whereas down in Florida it is mostly clear and seen as blue. This same oxygen-rich cold water makes for a better environment for marine life, which is why there's a big fishing industry in colder areas, and why there's fishing in the Artic and Antarctic.
It's been fifteen years since I was in the water treatment business, but I doubt any of the fundamentals have changed.
Here's how it works: You mix a chemical called a 'flocculant' in with the water, which has been roughly filtered and perhaps let sit for a while to let any silt settle. This water is then mixed with air under high pressure, and pumped into tanks, entering halfway between the bottom and top of the tank with as little turbulence as possible. Because of the decrease in pressure, air bubbled form, and the flocculants cause small particles (bacteria, shit, uranium) to stick to them. The bubbles then gradually float to the surface, where the 'suds' or 'scum' is skimmed off, again with a minimal amount of turbulence. After enough of this happens, the water is then called clean and sucked out and wasted on fertilizing laws.
Generally, this is done on a continuous basis, and the equipment is a big, round vat. The ones I knew were from 5 to 23 meters in diameter. There's some real issues that make this process a bit more tricky than the description above would make it seem:
1) raw water is not produced, nor clean water consumed, at uniform rates. However, the filtering equipment works correctly at a very small flow/pressure. Holding tanks on either side are neccessary.
2) Flocculant is a consumable, and it takes a certain amount to clean a given volume of water to a certain improvement. Costs money.
3) water is not uniformly dirty.
4) generally, the larger units can let water stay and bubbles float (and grit sink to the bottom) longer, so less flocculant is needed. But these take up more space...LOTS more.
5) How clean does water really need to be? If there's some nasty outbreak (Cholera, Giardia) maybe it needs to be much cleaner. Maybe not so much at other times. Who makes that decision? My thoughts are that tap water should only be cleaned to a certain percent, which can be used for lawns / car-washes / firefighting / pools, cleaned a bit further for household uses (laundry, bathing) by an in-home filter, and cleaned further for drinking by a tap-based carbon filter (Brita, etc). But this is a lot of equipment. Real serious policy issues here. I doubt that such a poor and corrupt country as Bangladesh can handle these problems correctly. But hey, I guess eomthing is worth a try.
Linux is under GPLv2 license. But it's not *owned* by Linus. Linus holds the trademarks, and owns a large portion of the code because he wrote it. But there has never been a requirement for anyone submitting changes to Linux to sign over their rights to said patch. Therefore, each and every submitter would have to approve any change of license. I can tell you now, that will NEVER happen.
Yes, the Chernobyl disaster caused a lot of problems. Yes, Chernobyl is in Ukraine. But if you look at where in Ukraine Chernobyl is, or, even better, look at a map of the contaminated areas http:en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl_disaster, you'll see that it's right nearby Belarus and Russia as well, and they got a lot of contamination. However bad the contamination of the ground around the reactor, the true damage was in the minds of the world. The damage the media caused in painting "Nukes" as bad and evil now has Europe, and to a lesser extent the US, deprecating nuclear power, and the only energy source which can take its place, are petroleum and natural gas. Funnily enough, Russia now controls a majority of the natural gas which Europe uses. HA HA. "When life gives you lemons, make lemonade" certainly must be a translation of something originally said in Russian.
I think the original post was made tongue-in-cheek.
Democractic republic's don't work, this study seems to say. The masses cannot be trusted to use reason and vote for the correct candidate. Thankfully, I don't live in a Democratic Replublic, I live in the USA, which is governed by unknown superiors (cryptarchy). I, for one, salute The Cryptarchy, for without them, we wouldn't have any semblance of order and progress.
This is no news. Just because it is done by a local network doesn't make it interesting. For instance, the same thing can be done with devices seeking an access point. If you don't know this already, be informed that 'regular' PCs can be used as an access point with the proper drivers and OS. The Fake AP problem really hasn't been exploited to the extent it could be. As far as I know -- maybe in some places, it has.
Funny, I am just finishing up my term paper on the Turing test, and Loebner prize, and why they're piles of bullshit. Maybe I should send it to google...wait, they'll just come get it from me.
Yes, there are too many nattering nabobs of negativity. Yeah right, like harnessing wave power is going to change the oceans....
I think one of the problems with these nabobs is they just don't have any idea of scale. The oceans are really, really huge. So is the Sun. It would take tidal powered installations many orders of magnitude larger than what could be built in the next hundred years to make any difference.
Wind power does have its drawbacks, but where it is used well it is quite useful. Off of Cape Cod, for instance, is a great place for wind turbines. I think Kerguelen would be even better, if it wer enot so remote.
What I am trying to say is we need to diversify our energy harvesting and distribution: oil, coal, wood, gas, nuclear, wind, tidal, solar, biogas as harvesting and electric, octane (gasoline), vegetable oils, biodiesel, hydrogen, organic gases, lithium, water, interia as storage and distribution. Probably more I've missed. Nuclear fission is a part of this: we need consistent and concentrated heat to do such things as smelt metals, and nuclear fission can do this with less pollution than the alternatives of coil and petroleum.
I am so tired of hearing iPod this, iPod that -- these devices are not the first, nor the best, the portable MP3 players. I am also surprised that so many people here in slashdot, who tend to be quite reactionary about privacy and public disclosure rights, seem to blithely surrender to iTunes, that software which rules your music collection -- one which is in some ways spyware (reporting back to apple what you listen to) and is subject to the whims of Apple and its cohorts. At what point will MP3s become unsupported unless digitally signed by some Authorized Party such as Apple or the RIAA? I live my Creative MUVO much better - just drag and drop your music, no sweat, no software, no Big Brother. And, unlike the iPod shuffle which I was misguided enough to get my girlfriend for Christmas, it doesn't require software (iTunes) which caused the CD drive of her computer to no longer be recognized by the OS. I returned it to the store, and am going to buy her a MUVO.
So, I found (literally, on the street) and old laptop, Pentium 133, 1440mb drive, cdrom, usb, all nice except that it's only got 16mb of ram, and uses non-standard memory so upgrading it would not be economical. I'd like to replace the windows 95 that's on it. But what Linux is out there that is currently being maintained that will run on this? I need some sort of GUI, and be able to run a somewhat modern web browser. But all of the Linux I have looked at so far are not currently maintained. Who is going to come out with security fixes for Slackware 3.2? and so on.
What Linux (or BSD) is maintained for desktops that are quite old legacy systems? None, that I can see. So I think it's going to stay Windows 95 for now. Sad.
Funny how much this resembles the StarGate in some aspects..."t may be a long while before we find out if he's right. In its present design, Dröscher and Häuser's experiment requires a magnetic coil several metres in diameter capable of sustaining an enormous current density." - several meters in diameter...How about 6.7 meters? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stargate_(device) and I wonder if Naqahdah is a superconductor. Now the question is, where are the Tau'ri (humans from Earth) get all the energy needed to run their StarGate?
And, how did the rest of the universe learn English so quickly after Daniel Jackson tought it to the people of Abydos? Because that's a technology we could REALLY use back here on earth, especially for workers at 7-11.....
It looks like a solution....in search of a problem. What makes it such a big deal? What makes it more useful than a program like Azureus? Nothing, as far as I can tell. But then again, it's reviewed on a site dedicated to Web 2.0, so a lot is explained.
does it fulfill portability promises?
on
NetBSD v3.0 Released
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
"Of course it runs NetBSD" - the old saw, it seems. But I think that NetBSD is falling down in this regard. Many ports don't work properly, or haven't been updated in ages. Mailing lists lie dormant, waiting for attention, such as SBMips (BroadCom Sybyte MIPS) - in spite of Wasabi Systems (which is basically the commercial arm of NetBSD) having a press release about Broadcom support back in 2002, not much is being done in extending NetBSD to the CPUs used in consumer-grade equipment like Linksys routers. It's not even available for a fee: Wasabi doesn't have it in their development products and doesn't plan to. Linux is clearly quite far out in front in this regard.
And it's not only MIPS: VAX ports are stale as well, from what I see here. This is sad. I like the idea of portability, and I like NetBSD - but I don't find that it lives up to its repuation in portability. Yes, someday I'll shut up and work on ports to the platforms I care, but in the meantime I am using Linux on the Broadcom CPUs and finding I enjoy it..almost too much to bother with NetBSD.
Yes, Zeno, you've pretty much hit the nail on the head, from what the ex at-stake people tell me. Except that they don't want to spin off the decompiler tech, they want it to die. If you have any knowledge that conflicts with this, please gimmie details, I'd love to know more.
It makes me wonder what Symantec DID buy @Stake for, if they're getting rid of the talented people and canning the products. The paranoid part of me says that they were put up to this task by some 'sinister force' that wants @stake gone. But I don't really believe that, do I?
Hi Chris (Space Rogue)! and to rewt66, SR left @Stake a long time ago. He had nothing to do with Symantec.
I think what Symantec has done to @Stake is sad, really sad. They're sitting on some really cool software technology and not doing anything with it. My guess is that the same heebie-geebies that make them do export restriction on L0phtCrack (a.k.a. LC5) are making them sit on this decompilation technology.
I'd say that I'd like to see l0pht reborn from the ashes, but differently. Hasty Pastry is close to it, and I am glad I was able to my part and start it, and sad I couldn't afford to stay involved. But I think that more than HP is needed. Hasty Pastry is specifically non-commercial. L0pht become overly commercial. There needs to be something that's commercial but not a part of The Machine. A place where there's both money and fun. But that's not going to happen in Boston, this city has become too expensive.
Yea, I have to agree -- doesn't this raise anti-trust issues? #1 buying #3 is a big deal. This certainly is going to require some review by the department of commerce and courts. But the past few years have been very permissive of trust abuse, all in the name of 'international competitiveness'. Bah!
I always though that Maxtor and Matrox should merge, considering they are just anagrams of each other.
I think this is great. It shows what's possible, even without a huge budget. I wish I could read more about it, but the sites have all been slashDOSed.
But just because they guy isn't paid to do this, and didn't spend a million dollars on the equipment, doesn't mean that anyone can do it -- setups like these are tricky. I imagine he had ot capture a lot of data, and use some really powerful computer for signal processing.
Now, if he can send signals BACK to mars, and have them interpreted by beings or equipment there, I'd be even further impressed.
I'd like to claim that this is a victory for ham radio. In a way it is, as it is a radio accomplishment and the fellow is not paid for this. But as it doesn't involve any transmission, it's more of an SWL (ShortWave Listener) accomplishment than an Amateur Radio accomplishment.
I found this article overly-digested (i.e. overly simple). For instance, they imply that Commodore developed the Amiga, when in fact Commodore bought the company, refined the product, and then released it.
I still have my Commodore SX-64 (luggable X-64 with a built in 5" monitor and floppy drive), several Apple ][+s and ][Es, an Amiga 1000 and 2000. I gave away my TRS-80 model III though (with its 8" drives), because it took up so much room.
I must say, of all of these, that my favorite is the Apple ][+. It was the first computer that I had in my house. But I feel somewhat saddened when I look at that logo, and see what a Marketing Machine Apple has become.
I think that this could be interesting. I wish there were more details in the article. Photovoltaics in space have promise, if they can be done cheaply. Someone here asked if they'd act like sails -- well I think that they might, a little, but perhaps they could be put into orbit in such a way that they could tack around the planet, so as not to be pushed too far into space. This would require some reaction mass, true, but perhaps when they orbit around to the night side of earth their orbit could be elliptical enough to scoop some atmospheric gas.
Does anyone know how many watts (lumens, whatever) of energy is available at approximately the distance of the earth from Sol? How about at Mars, and Venus? Just to try to get an idea of how much power might really be available.
Slashdot Mirror
Hrm, I wonder how well SCTP would fare under a Naptha (http://www.cert.org/advisories/CA-2000-21.html) type attack. Perhaps I should test it and find out. A good way to kill an afternoon...
Nein, du bist ein Berliner!
As usual, site slashdotted. But I get a download, eventually - and it's corrupted. Or is it encrypted ? ;)
Why can't people just use bittorrent for this sort of thing? Isn't it obvious that coral cache doesn't work?
This is true, to an extent. Humans can live outside of the 'standard day', as can other forms of life. There is a limit to what is healthy, however, and I know some people who have lived in northern Sweden during the winter, who will testify to the depression it can cause. I am aware that the first humans at Venus could be exposed to artificial sunlight and have shades drawn for their sleeping time in an effort to minimize this damage. Since the planetary shading is required, anyhow, in order to the atmosphere to change to something suitable for humans, it only makes sense to make the small extra effort to create an earth-like day/night cycle.
The great thing about what I am proposing is that the technology is within our grasp, as is shown by this article on solar sails. We still have much to accomplish before it becomes practical, however, but I am confidant that within two hundred years we will have started such a project.
- 1. providing some shade. Venus is obviously a lot closer to the sun, but it's not so close that we can't provide adequate 'sunglasses'.
- 2. providing day and night. Venus rotates very slowly - its day is about a year long! This causes lots of problems. First, it causes big heat differentials between one side of the planet and the other. The day side will be hot and the night side will be cold, and there would probably be big winds because of this. Also, plants and animals from earth require day/night cycles to survive and be healthy.
One of the problems with providing shade is that the very useful effect of the solar wind will push the shades beyond venus or into it. This can be countered by having the shades orbit venus, and tack against the solar wind, turning their sailing surface at different angles in relation to their intertia to maintain the desired orbit. There would be a rather thick and tall ring of sails some distance out from venus, coordinating to reflect light in a manner which would lighten some areas of the planet while darkening others - mimicing the daycycle of terra. A fine-grained control over this lighting could be used to provide optimum lighting for a specific area growing a specific crop, or concentrated beam could be focused on the collector at a solar power station.This being slashdot, I am sure someone will think they're really clever by pointing that this same system could be used as a weapon, like a magnifying glass upon ants, at any target on the planet's surface. But be imaginative! The target would not be confined towards being on Venus, earth could be attacked too!
Warlike purposes aside, such a vast mirror system could also beam power to other parts of the solar system, or provide signalling across the vast reaches of space.
The problem is not only in the design of the sails, but in a factory to economically product the billions or trillions of them which will be required, and a system for placing them. Another system for co-ordination and maintenance will also be required. But all of these are conceivably do-able.
Please excuse spelling, grammar, and other assorted errors, as it's late and I am tired. If I had an job terraforming venus, you can be sure I'd be a lot more careful in preparing my proposals.
Yes, which is why agreeing to a compromise by meeting a wrong person halfway is a way to guarantee that both you and he are wrong. Hey, unity! brotherhood!
Well, yes, that sounds pretty much like some of the wastewater treatment I have seen. Except that the oxygen in the water doesn't make it 'clean'. The reason why there's not enough oxygen in the water is because of the algae feeding on the nitrogen-rich (due to sewage) water, and they require oxygen. So, the water still has a lot of algae in it after this process, but that's okay for putting into rivers, because, well, that's part of the natural process. But it's still not 'clean' enough for drinking.
On a side note, cold water holds oxygen much better than warm water. Therefore, there is much more algae in cold ocean water than warm, which is why up here in New England the sea looks a dark green, whereas down in Florida it is mostly clear and seen as blue. This same oxygen-rich cold water makes for a better environment for marine life, which is why there's a big fishing industry in colder areas, and why there's fishing in the Artic and Antarctic.
It's been fifteen years since I was in the water treatment business, but I doubt any of the fundamentals have changed.
Here's how it works: You mix a chemical called a 'flocculant' in with the water, which has been roughly filtered and perhaps let sit for a while to let any silt settle. This water is then mixed with air under high pressure, and pumped into tanks, entering halfway between the bottom and top of the tank with as little turbulence as possible. Because of the decrease in pressure, air bubbled form, and the flocculants cause small particles (bacteria, shit, uranium) to stick to them. The bubbles then gradually float to the surface, where the 'suds' or 'scum' is skimmed off, again with a minimal amount of turbulence. After enough of this happens, the water is then called clean and sucked out and wasted on fertilizing laws.
Generally, this is done on a continuous basis, and the equipment is a big, round vat. The ones I knew were from 5 to 23 meters in diameter. There's some real issues that make this process a bit more tricky than the description above would make it seem:
1) raw water is not produced, nor clean water consumed, at uniform rates. However, the filtering equipment works correctly at a very small flow/pressure. Holding tanks on either side are neccessary.
2) Flocculant is a consumable, and it takes a certain amount to clean a given volume of water to a certain improvement. Costs money.
3) water is not uniformly dirty.
4) generally, the larger units can let water stay and bubbles float (and grit sink to the bottom) longer, so less flocculant is needed. But these take up more space...LOTS more.
5) How clean does water really need to be? If there's some nasty outbreak (Cholera, Giardia) maybe it needs to be much cleaner. Maybe not so much at other times. Who makes that decision? My thoughts are that tap water should only be cleaned to a certain percent, which can be used for lawns / car-washes / firefighting / pools, cleaned a bit further for household uses (laundry, bathing) by an in-home filter, and cleaned further for drinking by a tap-based carbon filter (Brita, etc). But this is a lot of equipment. Real serious policy issues here. I doubt that such a poor and corrupt country as Bangladesh can handle these problems correctly. But hey, I guess eomthing is worth a try.
Linux is under GPLv2 license. But it's not *owned* by Linus. Linus holds the trademarks, and owns a large portion of the code because he wrote it. But there has never been a requirement for anyone submitting changes to Linux to sign over their rights to said patch. Therefore, each and every submitter would have to approve any change of license. I can tell you now, that will NEVER happen.
Yes, the Chernobyl disaster caused a lot of problems. Yes, Chernobyl is in Ukraine. But if you look at where in Ukraine Chernobyl is, or, even better, look at a map of the contaminated areas http:en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chernobyl_disaster, you'll see that it's right nearby Belarus and Russia as well, and they got a lot of contamination. However bad the contamination of the ground around the reactor, the true damage was in the minds of the world. The damage the media caused in painting "Nukes" as bad and evil now has Europe, and to a lesser extent the US, deprecating nuclear power, and the only energy source which can take its place, are petroleum and natural gas. Funnily enough, Russia now controls a majority of the natural gas which Europe uses. HA HA. "When life gives you lemons, make lemonade" certainly must be a translation of something originally said in Russian.
I think the original post was made tongue-in-cheek.
Democractic republic's don't work, this study seems to say. The masses cannot be trusted to use reason and vote for the correct candidate. Thankfully, I don't live in a Democratic Replublic, I live in the USA, which is governed by unknown superiors (cryptarchy). I, for one, salute The Cryptarchy, for without them, we wouldn't have any semblance of order and progress.
This is no news. Just because it is done by a local network doesn't make it interesting. For instance, the same thing can be done with devices seeking an access point. If you don't know this already, be informed that 'regular' PCs can be used as an access point with the proper drivers and OS. The Fake AP problem really hasn't been exploited to the extent it could be. As far as I know -- maybe in some places, it has.
Funny, I am just finishing up my term paper on the Turing test, and Loebner prize, and why they're piles of bullshit. Maybe I should send it to google...wait, they'll just come get it from me.
Yes, there are too many nattering nabobs of negativity. Yeah right, like harnessing wave power is going to change the oceans....
I think one of the problems with these nabobs is they just don't have any idea of scale. The oceans are really, really huge. So is the Sun. It would take tidal powered installations many orders of magnitude larger than what could be built in the next hundred years to make any difference.
Wind power does have its drawbacks, but where it is used well it is quite useful. Off of Cape Cod, for instance, is a great place for wind turbines. I think Kerguelen would be even better, if it wer enot so remote.
What I am trying to say is we need to diversify our energy harvesting and distribution: oil, coal, wood, gas, nuclear, wind, tidal, solar, biogas as harvesting and electric, octane (gasoline), vegetable oils, biodiesel, hydrogen, organic gases, lithium, water, interia as storage and distribution. Probably more I've missed. Nuclear fission is a part of this: we need consistent and concentrated heat to do such things as smelt metals, and nuclear fission can do this with less pollution than the alternatives of coil and petroleum.
I am so tired of hearing iPod this, iPod that -- these devices are not the first, nor the best, the portable MP3 players. I am also surprised that so many people here in slashdot, who tend to be quite reactionary about privacy and public disclosure rights, seem to blithely surrender to iTunes, that software which rules your music collection -- one which is in some ways spyware (reporting back to apple what you listen to) and is subject to the whims of Apple and its cohorts. At what point will MP3s become unsupported unless digitally signed by some Authorized Party such as Apple or the RIAA? I live my Creative MUVO much better - just drag and drop your music, no sweat, no software, no Big Brother. And, unlike the iPod shuffle which I was misguided enough to get my girlfriend for Christmas, it doesn't require software (iTunes) which caused the CD drive of her computer to no longer be recognized by the OS. I returned it to the store, and am going to buy her a MUVO.
So, I found (literally, on the street) and old laptop, Pentium 133, 1440mb drive, cdrom, usb, all nice except that it's only got 16mb of ram, and uses non-standard memory so upgrading it would not be economical. I'd like to replace the windows 95 that's on it. But what Linux is out there that is currently being maintained that will run on this? I need some sort of GUI, and be able to run a somewhat modern web browser. But all of the Linux I have looked at so far are not currently maintained. Who is going to come out with security fixes for Slackware 3.2? and so on.
What Linux (or BSD) is maintained for desktops that are quite old legacy systems? None, that I can see. So I think it's going to stay Windows 95 for now. Sad.
And, how did the rest of the universe learn English so quickly after Daniel Jackson tought it to the people of Abydos? Because that's a technology we could REALLY use back here on earth, especially for workers at 7-11.....
It looks like a solution....in search of a problem. What makes it such a big deal? What makes it more useful than a program like Azureus? Nothing, as far as I can tell. But then again, it's reviewed on a site dedicated to Web 2.0, so a lot is explained.
"Of course it runs NetBSD" - the old saw, it seems. But I think that NetBSD is falling down in this regard. Many ports don't work properly, or haven't been updated in ages. Mailing lists lie dormant, waiting for attention, such as SBMips (BroadCom Sybyte MIPS) - in spite of Wasabi Systems (which is basically the commercial arm of NetBSD) having a press release about Broadcom support back in 2002, not much is being done in extending NetBSD to the CPUs used in consumer-grade equipment like Linksys routers. It's not even available for a fee: Wasabi doesn't have it in their development products and doesn't plan to. Linux is clearly quite far out in front in this regard.
And it's not only MIPS: VAX ports are stale as well, from what I see here. This is sad. I like the idea of portability, and I like NetBSD - but I don't find that it lives up to its repuation in portability. Yes, someday I'll shut up and work on ports to the platforms I care, but in the meantime I am using Linux on the Broadcom CPUs and finding I enjoy it..almost too much to bother with NetBSD.
Yes, Zeno, you've pretty much hit the nail on the head, from what the ex at-stake people tell me. Except that they don't want to spin off the decompiler tech, they want it to die. If you have any knowledge that conflicts with this, please gimmie details, I'd love to know more.
It makes me wonder what Symantec DID buy @Stake for, if they're getting rid of the talented people and canning the products. The paranoid part of me says that they were put up to this task by some 'sinister force' that wants @stake gone. But I don't really believe that, do I?
Hi Chris (Space Rogue)! and to rewt66, SR left @Stake a long time ago. He had nothing to do with Symantec.
I think what Symantec has done to @Stake is sad, really sad. They're sitting on some really cool software technology and not doing anything with it. My guess is that the same heebie-geebies that make them do export restriction on L0phtCrack (a.k.a. LC5) are making them sit on this decompilation technology.
I'd say that I'd like to see l0pht reborn from the ashes, but differently. Hasty Pastry is close to it, and I am glad I was able to my part and start it, and sad I couldn't afford to stay involved. But I think that more than HP is needed. Hasty Pastry is specifically non-commercial. L0pht become overly commercial. There needs to be something that's commercial but not a part of The Machine. A place where there's both money and fun. But that's not going to happen in Boston, this city has become too expensive.
Yea, I have to agree -- doesn't this raise anti-trust issues? #1 buying #3 is a big deal. This certainly is going to require some review by the department of commerce and courts. But the past few years have been very permissive of trust abuse, all in the name of 'international competitiveness'. Bah!
I always though that Maxtor and Matrox should merge, considering they are just anagrams of each other.
I think this is great. It shows what's possible, even without a huge budget. I wish I could read more about it, but the sites have all been slashDOSed.
But just because they guy isn't paid to do this, and didn't spend a million dollars on the equipment, doesn't mean that anyone can do it -- setups like these are tricky. I imagine he had ot capture a lot of data, and use some really powerful computer for signal processing.
Now, if he can send signals BACK to mars, and have them interpreted by beings or equipment there, I'd be even further impressed.
I'd like to claim that this is a victory for ham radio. In a way it is, as it is a radio accomplishment and the fellow is not paid for this. But as it doesn't involve any transmission, it's more of an SWL (ShortWave Listener) accomplishment than an Amateur Radio accomplishment.
I found this article overly-digested (i.e. overly simple). For instance, they imply that Commodore developed the Amiga, when in fact Commodore bought the company, refined the product, and then released it.
I still have my Commodore SX-64 (luggable X-64 with a built in 5" monitor and floppy drive), several Apple ][+s and ][Es, an Amiga 1000 and 2000. I gave away my TRS-80 model III though (with its 8" drives), because it took up so much room.
I must say, of all of these, that my favorite is the Apple ][+. It was the first computer that I had in my house. But I feel somewhat saddened when I look at that logo, and see what a Marketing Machine Apple has become.
I think that this could be interesting. I wish there were more details in the article. Photovoltaics in space have promise, if they can be done cheaply. Someone here asked if they'd act like sails -- well I think that they might, a little, but perhaps they could be put into orbit in such a way that they could tack around the planet, so as not to be pushed too far into space. This would require some reaction mass, true, but perhaps when they orbit around to the night side of earth their orbit could be elliptical enough to scoop some atmospheric gas.
Does anyone know how many watts (lumens, whatever) of energy is available at approximately the distance of the earth from Sol? How about at Mars, and Venus? Just to try to get an idea of how much power might really be available.