ISTR reading that in the old Soviet Union, anyone who bought a typewriter was required to register a sample of their type with the state. (For you young pups out there, old mechanical typewriters used to have enough variations in the print heads that you could supposedly identify a typewriter from a print sample.
I don't know if there was any such a procedure, but I remember that Soviet government was very paranoid about access to printers and copying machines.
If perfect-accuracy printing devices also existed, anyone could duplicate these documents, in effect printing money for themselves.
Are you all nuts? Money (of almost all countries -- not only US) are printed on special, not available anywhere and hard to produce in small quantities type of paper, with watermarks (physical ones). Difficulty of duplicating the image (including extremely high necessary resolution, useless for most of other purposes) is only one of many things that prevents mass counterfeiting.
Re:I really dislike this sort of article
on
WTO + SDMI = NWO
·
· Score: 1
In addition you are neglecting the representative nature of participants in global organizations. In the US elected officials represent the citizens in determination of their vote. Citizens do not have a direct say in each and every rule or law that is passed. Similarly governments represent their citizens in international organizations. If they do a poor job of it, their constituents will boot them out of office.
This is too indirect -- at this level corruption can completely negate any effect, population has on those decisions.
This is not correct. The UN does not allow any and all individual countries to veto decisions. The UN only allows members of the Security Council, which includes all the major world powers on a permanent basis and some representatives from the General Assembly on a rotating basis to veto decisions THAT ARE BEFORE THE SECURITY COUNCIL. Many decisions taken at the UN are in fact implemented solely by majority or 2/3 vote in the General Assembly.
I have mentioned veto in NATO, not UN. And even in UN it's much better than just "whoever has stronger economy, bigger guns, larger army and more violent traditions" what pretty much described the world before that.
Historically governments abide by treaties only when it is to their best interest. Governments are the makers and breakers of treaties at their own whim. A treaty at an international level has no power over a government other than the self interest of that goverment.
This works as long as inconvenience of losing a "package deal" that comes with organization does not justify significant damage to the society, caused by some of decisions in the "package" in the mind of participants. But since currently all governments (US included) require constant significant pressure from the population to implement and honor even basic human rights, there is a danger that international organization can get in much better position to influence the government than population.
Re:I really dislike this sort of article
on
WTO + SDMI = NWO
·
· Score: 1
The problem is not that organizations are global. There are two separate problems.
First problem is that there is no mechanism that implements their responsibility to population. Governments have this mechanism -- they can be re-elected, overthrown or in the very worst case placed in situation where they have either to make decision that population demands, or get rid of large part of population.
Second problem is that countries are not in equal position in global economy. While UN is based on the idea that countries' influence on UN policy is not entirely based on its political, military or economical strength (and if it was, such organization would be near to worthless), and even heavily US-dominated NATO allows every country to veto a decision (even though such action will definitely more dangerous for military weaker country in the long run), organizations that handle trade, business and finances in the worst case represent the interests of few strongest players, and in the best case are preserving status quo even when it hurts some countries that don't have resources to perform serious economical pressure. When the only mechanism that implements the decision is threats ("if your country won't implement our policy, we won't give loans/disallow trade/increase tariffs" vs. "if your organization will make decision that we don't like, we won't pay for it") it becomes a tool to increase pressure on weaker players, and in this case pressure on population goes through governments even if otherwise it could be done only through companies. In general treaties have power over governments while governments have power over companies, but when large international organization is controlled by companies, and its power is accepted by governments through treaties, it gives companies one more, and very efficient way to affect governments' policies, something that they would do by only indirect, less efficient ways otherwise.
It's Unicode -- a "global" stnadard, that W3C and IETF demand to implement everywhere yet noone does because it contradicts with the idea of the set of simple national charsets. Looks like ignoring international organizations when they are trying to "rule the world" isn't limited to governments.
I don't know what Gateway 2000 will do, but probably it has something to do with cows. And in one parody movie there was a Fox logo that reads "20th century SUX", so they can adopt that. Or merge with some competitors.
The other part of the problem that while Motif was cloned for a good reason (a lot of software, both free and proprietary, uses it), there is no possible way to convince free software developers to clone CDE unless some of them are hell bent on passing the certification -- CDE is inferior to free software (KDE, GNOME, any decently configured window manager other than twm), and isn't mandatory to run any existing programs.
In addition, if Linux (or any other UNIX-flavored OS) can't satisfy those requirements, why should the definition, rather than Linux (or any other UNIX-flavored OS), be changed?
Because requirements include mandatory use of some proprietary software (made by TOG itself, BTW).
You're right, it did work. But could you imagine if this was you? The FBI calls you threatening all kinds of things. I would have done the same thing: take if off until I figure out if they can fulfill their threats. Free speech is wonderful but jail sucks.
This is at least one of the reasons why you don't have a hosting company. Having a business requires responsible behavior toward customers, and I am very pleased that we now have a good example that caving in to a bluffing from FBI was much more damaging than a person expected. I completely agree with people who flamed that provider and hope that it will make others think before damaging freedom of speech.
Wearable computers could be cool, but I still think that no matter how they're worn, if they are worn, they will be clumsy.
I assume, the only real concern is a display. It probably won't take long time until a projection setup as light as one on Dominion ships in ST:DS9 will become cheap. And there is already a smaller thing, built into glasses.
There is a well known correlation between those who are bullied and those who turn into bullys - they are often one and the same thing
If so, how do you describe that almost all bullies are extremely dumb? I have rather low opinion about society, but the percentage of idiots in the whole society can't be _that_ high.
...so everybody lookie -- our evil Chinese enemies made some incremental progress in radar technology, everybody should be scared shitless, shut up about human rights and social problems in US, forget about rotting education, and start supporting True American Values -- chauvinism, big guns and meaty contracts to large companies.
We have to balance safety and need here. Frankly, I don't trust the Ukranians to do that impartially. During the cold war, Wester Culture made the Russians look like stupid, dirty fools. I dunno on what I base this, but I think they are.
I think that you are a stuck up, arrogant, chauvinistic, ignorant, gullible american dumbass -- what is slightly better than how Communist propaganda made Americans look and is slightly worse than what I see in most Americans, yet perfectly describes qualities, you just demonstrated.
Yeah well i saw an aritcle on "Ukrainian Industry" about three years ago??? and it seems that they are not i need of electricity like they are in need of cleaner factories. They do not even put the basic scrubbing systems on their plants that have black smoke bellowing out of them 24 hours a day.
And does mr. smartass know what do those "factories" produce? Those over-polluting "factories" are either steel plants or, and mostly -- surprise -- power plants. Coal-burning ones because this is what Ukraine has.
2. Linux, AFAIK is not a "reverse engineered Unix clone".
Of course it is! In the sense that it was developed by initially trying to emulate the behaviour of other unices as far as possible (pragmatically). Certainly the GNU tools were designed with high compatibility with UNIX in mind, and obviously the kernel had to be quite compatible (and it is certified POSIX compliant - but then again, so is NT!). But of course "clone" doesn't do it justice.
There was no any "reverse engineering" -- Unix was already documented enough to make a compatible clone without getting anything other than docs, directly or indirectly, from existing implementations. And
I'd say the biggest "advantage" Netscape had over Mosaic is that the people who developed Mosaic left the university and founded Netscape, leaving NCSA with nothing more than a source base. Early Netscape was almost Mosaic - bug for bug compatible, and IIRC, an early beta of Netscape went out that had the Mosaic logo in the top right corner.
Nope. It had completely different logo, with large "M" and some rotating things -- completely different from NCSA logo. Netscape, Inc. was known as Mosaic Communications at that time, however that was the only relation with names/trademarks/logos.
Or even Netscape. While it's probably not true that Netscape was developed used copies of the source of Mosaic, fact is that it was developed by the people developing Mosaic, in record time, and bug for bug compatible. "Netscape gray" == "Mosaic gray", for instance. That's not a coincidence.
Nope again -- default color is inherited from Motif (later Windows 95 widgets were also heavily influenced by Motif, and so were GTK ones).
The IMG element was known to be a stupid way to do it even back then. Why make a kind of inclusion that only works for a few related media types?
IMG tag works only for image/* MIME types because it is used to place embedded imagis in the page -- those images would be meaningless if placed anywhere else or if attributes in IMG tag will be ignored. This is not the same for any other type, even if the file/object is supposed to be embedded in the page -- no damage will be done if most of "embedded" files/objects will be handled by external "player" with its own controls and user interface.
Al Gore needed exposure and money for elections. He scheduled the meeting with what perceived as the most "advanced" company in the area that he is supposed to support, expecting to get positive PR from it to himself, declare his support for everything Microsoft does and look good overall. However before he arrives things turn ugly, and Microsoft suddently has a lot of dirt that Al Gore doesn't want to associate himself with. Microsoft sees any public event with Al "Is there some embarrassing statement about technology I haven't made yet?" Gore as possible PR disaster if anything antitrust-related is mentioned, so they are trying to keep press away.
Al Gore realizes that considering his past praise of Microsoft, meeting behind closed doors will arise suspicions that he is either trying to help Microsoft using his current position, or promise support in the future if he will be elected, so to avoid being perceived as corrupt politician he demands to allow press at the meeting, and tries to avoid the whole issue of Microsoft troubles to be mentioned. Microsofties are trying to play along, however not being politicians they fail to realize that any mentioning of lawsuit will force Al Gore to either declare his support of Microsoft and be at risk of losing points in political battles, or declare the support of government in attempt to keep the image of "supporter of technology". So few dumbasses ask him about antitrust lawsuit, and Al Gore tries to play safe. Yet, not being smart enough to understand where he should switch into "I have no comment and no promises" mode, he gives in, and makes vague, stupid-looking promise to "do something about that" despite being in no position to do that.
Benchmarks were made on low-latency network and with four network interfaces. In reality HTTP server can get load this high only with very high latency of the network -- clients simply can't be that close to the server by the network topology -- backbones cause huge delays. I doubt that with high latency network (can be simulated in laboratory) and single gigabit interface instead of four 100Mbit/s the results will be the same.
Can't we just have one disscution on/. with out hearing communist fringe blame EVERY problem in the world on the US and big scary corps that have nothing better to do then repress third world nations.
What about US justifying anything in its international policy without blaming Communists everywhere for everything?
And I'm running 32mb ram, 166mhz cpu, 1024x768 16bpp, and KDE with no themes or wallpaper whatsoever. Why can't Linux GUIs be as fast as Windows? Sure, the thing is stable, but it is hard to get anything done.
Configure your IDE disk parameters with hdparm -- what you see is inefficient swapping caused by over-conservative configuration. Or/and add memory to reduce swapping.
Slashdot Mirror
ISTR reading that in the old Soviet Union, anyone who bought a typewriter was required to register a sample of their type with the state. (For you young pups out there, old mechanical typewriters used to have enough variations in the print heads that you could supposedly identify a typewriter from a print sample.
I don't know if there was any such a procedure, but I remember that Soviet government was very paranoid about access to printers and copying machines.
If perfect-accuracy printing devices also existed, anyone could duplicate these documents, in effect printing money for themselves.
Are you all nuts? Money (of almost all countries -- not only US) are printed on special, not available anywhere and hard to produce in small quantities type of paper, with watermarks (physical ones). Difficulty of duplicating the image (including extremely high necessary resolution, useless for most of other purposes) is only one of many things that prevents mass counterfeiting.
In addition you are neglecting the representative nature of participants in global organizations. In the US elected officials represent the citizens in determination of their vote. Citizens do not have a direct say in each and every rule or law that is passed. Similarly governments represent their citizens in international organizations. If they do a poor job of it, their constituents will boot them out of office.
This is too indirect -- at this level corruption can completely negate any effect, population has on those decisions.
This is not correct. The UN does not allow any and all individual countries to veto decisions. The UN only allows members of the Security Council, which includes all the major world powers on a permanent basis and some representatives from the General Assembly on a rotating basis to veto decisions THAT ARE BEFORE THE SECURITY COUNCIL. Many decisions taken at the UN are in fact implemented solely by majority or 2/3 vote in the General Assembly.
I have mentioned veto in NATO, not UN. And even in UN it's much better than just "whoever has stronger economy, bigger guns, larger army and more violent traditions" what pretty much described the world before that.
Historically governments abide by treaties only when it is to their best interest. Governments are the makers and breakers of treaties at their own whim. A treaty at an international level has no power over a government other than the self interest of that goverment.
This works as long as inconvenience of losing a "package deal" that comes with organization does not justify significant damage to the society, caused by some of decisions in the "package" in the mind of participants. But since currently all governments (US included) require constant significant pressure from the population to implement and honor even basic human rights, there is a danger that international organization can get in much better position to influence the government than population.
The problem is not that organizations are global. There are two separate problems.
First problem is that there is no mechanism that implements their responsibility to population. Governments have this mechanism -- they can be re-elected, overthrown or in the very worst case placed in situation where they have either to make decision that population demands, or get rid of large part of population.
Second problem is that countries are not in equal position in global economy. While UN is based on the idea that countries' influence on UN policy is not entirely based on its political, military or economical strength (and if it was, such organization would be near to worthless), and even heavily US-dominated NATO allows every country to veto a decision (even though such action will definitely more dangerous for military weaker country in the long run), organizations that handle trade, business and finances in the worst case represent the interests of few strongest players, and in the best case are preserving status quo even when it hurts some countries that don't have resources to perform serious economical pressure. When the only mechanism that implements the decision is threats ("if your country won't implement our policy, we won't give loans/disallow trade/increase tariffs" vs. "if your organization will make decision that we don't like, we won't pay for it") it becomes a tool to increase pressure on weaker players, and in this case pressure on population goes through governments even if otherwise it could be done only through companies. In general treaties have power over governments while governments have power over companies, but when large international organization is controlled by companies, and its power is accepted by governments through treaties, it gives companies one more, and very efficient way to affect governments' policies, something that they would do by only indirect, less efficient ways otherwise.
It's Unicode -- a "global" stnadard, that W3C and IETF demand to implement everywhere yet noone does because it contradicts with the idea of the set of simple national charsets. Looks like ignoring international organizations when they are trying to "rule the world" isn't limited to governments.
pine reads html mail and shows it as text, so images aren't autonatically requested.
I don't know what Gateway 2000 will do, but probably it has something to do with cows. And in one parody movie there was a Fox logo that reads "20th century SUX", so they can adopt that. Or merge with some competitors.
The other part of the problem that while Motif was cloned for a good reason (a lot of software, both free and proprietary, uses it), there is no possible way to convince free software developers to clone CDE unless some of them are hell bent on passing the certification -- CDE is inferior to free software (KDE, GNOME, any decently configured window manager other than twm), and isn't mandatory to run any existing programs.
In addition, if Linux (or any other UNIX-flavored OS) can't satisfy those requirements, why should the definition, rather than Linux (or any other UNIX-flavored OS), be changed?
Because requirements include mandatory use of some proprietary software (made by TOG itself, BTW).
You're right, it did work. But could you imagine if this was you? The FBI calls you threatening all kinds of things. I would have done the same thing: take if off until I figure out if they can fulfill their threats. Free speech is wonderful but jail sucks.
This is at least one of the reasons why you don't have a hosting company. Having a business requires responsible behavior toward customers, and I am very pleased that we now have a good example that caving in to a bluffing from FBI was much more damaging than a person expected. I completely agree with people who flamed that provider and hope that it will make others think before damaging freedom of speech.
Wearable computers could be cool, but I still think that no matter how they're worn, if they are worn, they will be clumsy.
I assume, the only real concern is a display. It probably won't take long time until a projection setup as light as one on Dominion ships in ST:DS9 will become cheap. And there is already a smaller thing, built into glasses.
This is normal by standards, local "educators" are using.
There is a well known correlation between those who are bullied and those who turn into bullys - they are often one and the same thing
If so, how do you describe that almost all bullies are extremely dumb? I have rather low opinion about society, but the percentage of idiots in the whole society can't be _that_ high.
...so everybody lookie -- our evil Chinese enemies made some incremental progress in radar technology, everybody should be scared shitless, shut up about human rights and social problems in US, forget about rotting education, and start supporting True American Values -- chauvinism, big guns and meaty contracts to large companies.
I haven't seen any major pieces that have comments done in Spanish.
Because people write comments in English -- even in non-English-speaking countries.
We have to balance safety and need here. Frankly, I don't trust the Ukranians to do that impartially. During the cold war, Wester Culture made the Russians look like stupid, dirty fools. I dunno on what I base this, but I think they are.
I think that you are a stuck up, arrogant, chauvinistic, ignorant, gullible american dumbass -- what is slightly better than how Communist propaganda made Americans look and is slightly worse than what I see in most Americans, yet perfectly describes qualities, you just demonstrated.
Yeah well i saw an aritcle on "Ukrainian Industry" about three years ago??? and it seems that they are not i need of electricity like they are in need of cleaner factories. They do not even put the basic scrubbing systems on their plants that have black smoke bellowing out of them 24 hours a day.
And does mr. smartass know what do those "factories" produce? Those over-polluting "factories" are either steel plants or, and mostly -- surprise -- power plants. Coal-burning ones because this is what Ukraine has.
...can't be patented.
2. Linux, AFAIK is not a "reverse engineered Unix clone".
Of course it is! In the sense that it was developed by initially trying to emulate the behaviour of other unices as far as possible (pragmatically). Certainly the GNU tools were designed with high compatibility with UNIX in mind, and obviously the kernel had to be quite compatible (and it is certified POSIX compliant - but then again, so is NT!). But of course "clone" doesn't do it justice.
There was no any "reverse engineering" -- Unix was already documented enough to make a compatible clone without getting anything other than docs, directly or indirectly, from existing implementations. And
I'd say the biggest "advantage" Netscape had over Mosaic is that the people who developed Mosaic left the university and founded Netscape, leaving NCSA with nothing more than a source base. Early Netscape was almost Mosaic - bug for bug compatible, and IIRC, an early beta of Netscape went out that had the Mosaic logo in the top right corner.
Nope. It had completely different logo, with large "M" and some rotating things -- completely different from NCSA logo. Netscape, Inc. was known as Mosaic Communications at that time, however that was the only relation with names/trademarks/logos.
Or even Netscape. While it's probably not true that Netscape was developed used copies of the source of Mosaic, fact is that it was developed by the people developing Mosaic, in record time, and bug for bug compatible. "Netscape gray" == "Mosaic gray", for instance. That's not a coincidence.
Nope again -- default color is inherited from Motif (later Windows 95 widgets were also heavily influenced by Motif, and so were GTK ones).
The IMG element was known to be a stupid way to do it even back then. Why make a kind of inclusion that only works for a few related media types?
IMG tag works only for image/* MIME types because it is used to place embedded imagis in the page -- those images would be meaningless if placed anywhere else or if attributes in IMG tag will be ignored. This is not the same for any other type, even if the file/object is supposed to be embedded in the page -- no damage will be done if most of "embedded" files/objects will be handled by external "player" with its own controls and user interface.
Al Gore needed exposure and money for elections. He scheduled the meeting with what perceived as the most "advanced" company in the area that he is supposed to support, expecting to get positive PR from it to himself, declare his support for everything Microsoft does and look good overall. However before he arrives things turn ugly, and Microsoft suddently has a lot of dirt that Al Gore doesn't want to associate himself with. Microsoft sees any public event with Al "Is there some embarrassing statement about technology I haven't made yet?" Gore as possible PR disaster if anything antitrust-related is mentioned, so they are trying to keep press away.
Al Gore realizes that considering his past praise of Microsoft, meeting behind closed doors will arise suspicions that he is either trying to help Microsoft using his current position, or promise support in the future if he will be elected, so to avoid being perceived as corrupt politician he demands to allow press at the meeting, and tries to avoid the whole issue of Microsoft troubles to be mentioned. Microsofties are trying to play along, however not being politicians they fail to realize that any mentioning of lawsuit will force Al Gore to either declare his support of Microsoft and be at risk of losing points in political battles, or declare the support of government in attempt to keep the image of "supporter of technology". So few dumbasses ask him about antitrust lawsuit, and Al Gore tries to play safe. Yet, not being smart enough to understand where he should switch into "I have no comment and no promises" mode, he gives in, and makes vague, stupid-looking promise to "do something about that" despite being in no position to do that.
Benchmarks were made on low-latency network and with four network interfaces. In reality HTTP server can get load this high only with very high latency of the network -- clients simply can't be that close to the server by the network topology -- backbones cause huge delays. I doubt that with high latency network (can be simulated in laboratory) and single gigabit interface instead of four 100Mbit/s the results will be the same.
Can't we just have one disscution on /. with out hearing communist fringe blame EVERY problem in the world on the US and big scary corps that have nothing better to do then repress third world nations.
What about US justifying anything in its international policy without blaming Communists everywhere for everything?
And I'm running 32mb ram, 166mhz cpu, 1024x768 16bpp, and KDE with no themes or wallpaper whatsoever. Why can't Linux GUIs be as fast as Windows? Sure, the thing is stable, but it is hard to get anything done.
Configure your IDE disk parameters with hdparm -- what you see is inefficient swapping caused by over-conservative configuration. Or/and add memory to reduce swapping.